transcription of Biographies->19.35.jpg From "Genealogical and Memorial History of the State of New Jersey" by Francis Bazley Lee in 1910: BEGIN Richard Vliet, son of Jacob Harrison and Mary Ann (Vliet) Lindabury, was born in Peapack, Somerset county, New Jersey, October 13, 1850, and is now living at Meadowbrook Farm, Bernardsville, New Jersey. He is a lawyer, with offices in the Prudential Building, Newark. After receiving his early education in the public schools he took a classical course with Rev. Henry P. Thompson, pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church at Peapack. He is now a member of the law firm of Lindabury, Depue & Faulks, and since he was admitted to the New Jersey bar in February, 1874, has not only been in active practice in Newark, but has been counsel in many of the most important corporation cases in New Jersey during the last ten years. He is a Democrat in politics. He married, July 8, 1892, Lillie, daughter of Jacob and Mary Van Saun. Children: Margaret, born April 29, 1896; Richard Vliet (2), born September 5, 1900. END transcription of Biographies->5.199.jpg From "New Jersey's First Citizens and State Guide" by John James Scannell in 1919 - 1920: BEGIN RICHARD VLIET LINDABURY--Bernardsville.--Lawyer. (Photograph published in Vol. 1, 1917). Born at Peapack, October 13, 1850; son of Jacob H. and Mary Ann (Vliet) Lindabury; married July 8, 1892, to Lillie V. S. Dinger, daughter of Albert Van Saun. Mr. and Mrs. Lindabury have one son and two daughters surviving. Richard V. Lindabury's father was a farmer in Somerset county; and Mr. Lindabury spent his early years between the farm and the district school. He seems to have been rather disposed to the ministry in his youth; and the Rev. Henry P. Thompson, pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church which his family attended undertook to tutor him for the calling. A college preparation was in contemplation. But after three years had been devoted to the study to fit him for admission, a serious sickness intervened to change his plans; and the tender of a clerk-ship in the office of ex-Congressman Alvah A. Clark pointed his ambitions towards the legal profession. Admitted to the bar at the February term of 1874, he opened an office in Bound Brook, but the field was small and he changed his locality to Elizabeth and afterwards to Newark. There in 1896, he established the law firm of Lindabury, Depue & Faulks, which is still practicing with offices in the Prudential Building. As counsel for certain stockholders he successfully opposed the merger of the Prudential Insurance Company with the Fidelity Trust Company in 1902. In 1905 he was employed to represent both the Prudential and Metropolitan Insurance Companies before the Armstrong investigating committee in New York, and in 1906 was elected General Counsel for the Prudential, a position which he has held ever since. Mr. Lindabury's skill as a corporation lawyer has commanded attention outside New Jersey as well as in it; and he has appeared in many of the most noted of recent year cases. When the Singer Sewing Machine Company charged the state of New Jersey with having taxed it in violation of its charter contract with the state, he was in court as the Company's counsel and won a decision in its favor. As counsel of the American Tobacco Company, he also resisted the State's attempt to dissolve it as a monopoly in restraint of trade. The sensational litigation that grew out of the controversy over the attempt of what was known as the "Rump" enate to bar out newly elected members in 1892, brought him again to the front as counsel and advisor. The democratic holdovers in the Senate of that year, claimed that a certificate of election did not constitute a title to a seat in the Senate, but that, under the constitutional provision which makes the Senate the judge of the election and returns of its members, a member elect could not be seated until the hold-over Senators had passed upon and accepted his credentials. The hold-over Senators were democrats, those claiming seats were republicans; and the refusal of the "hold-overs" to admit the others to the chamber provoked an almost riotous demostration at the State House. Mr. Lindabury and Frederic W. Stevens, now Vice Chancellor, were retained by the State and they succeeded in compelling the rival senates to submit their respective claims to the Supreme Court, which seated the republicans. That was the second great state tumult in which Mr. Lindabury had been a leading figure. While he was still practicing law in Elizabeth, the race track issue became an absorbing one all over the common wealth. The jockeys, who had already opened all-the-year-around courses at Guttenberg at one end of the State and at Gloucester at the other end, also opened at Clifton in Passaic and at Linden in Union, other tracks that drew hordes of undesirable sports. They felt themselves in such absolute control of the State that they put a Gloucester tract "starter" in the Speakers chair in the House of Assembly, and, when protests against their seizure of the government poured into the House of Legislature, refused even to permit them to be read. The people of Union felt particularly outraged by the invasion of their county, and great mass meetings were held to arrange a demostration at Trenton that would force the attention of the jockey legislatures. The white-haired Parson Kempshall was second only to Mr. Lindabury in firing these monster gatherings to the burning point. The movement became infectious; and an army of indignant citizens stormed the State Capital and took possession of the jockey Speaker's chair. The excitement did not abate until it had culminated in a movement for an amendment to the state constitution that would forever rob the racing resorts of their chief attraction. The proposed new clause of the State's charter forbade gambling in any of its forms. It was the issue in the campaign of the succeeding fall. Mr. Lindabury in Union was first among those who took the platform in advocacy of the amendment; and the people, at a special referendum, ordered it into the state constitution. The jockeys were hurled from power, and the democratic party, whose chiefs in the State had countenanced them, lost control of the State for many years afterwards. The race track people attcked the amendment on legal grounds; and Mr. Lindabury was of the counsel who pleaded successfully in the courts for its retention. It is in the courts outside the State however that Mr. Lindabury has been largely in the eye of the nation. He was the chief cousel of the United States Steel Corporation in the suit set foot by the United States Government to dissolve it as in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law. The trial was before Judges Buffington, Hunt, McPherson and Woodley. Associated with Mr. Lindabury were Joseph H. Choate of New York, John G. Johnson of Philadelphia, C. A. Severance of St. Paul, and David A. Reed in the litigation Mr. Lindabury became, by the retirement of Francis L. Stetson, the General Counsel of the Steel Corporation. Quite as conspicuous were his parts in the New Haven Railroad controversies and in the Pujo Congressional Committee's investigation of the "Money Trust." He was the personal counsel of the late John P. Morgan in the "Money trust" investigation and represented both Mr. Morgan and William Rockefeller in the New Haven litigation. Mr. Lindabury was honored with degree of L. L. D. by Rutger's College in 1904, and by Princeton University in 1915. He has a farm at Bernardsville, covering several hundred acres which is noted for its fine herd of Guernsey cattle. He is President of the New Jersey Interstate Park Commission and a member of several lending clubs in New York and New Jersey. END From the Evening News of the Tonawandas, North Tonawanda, New York dated July 15, 1925: BEGIN Richard V. Lindabury Found Dead in Woods (United Press Leased Wire) Somerville, N. Y., July 15 - Richard V. Lindabury, general counsel and a director of the united States Steel corporation and Prudential Insurance company, was found dead in the woods near his Bernardsville estate today, according to word received here by William H. Long, Somerset county physician. The body was found near Lindabury's horse on which he had gone riding early this morning. Death is reported to have been due to natural causes. END Note related to death notice above ... BEGIN Posted: 05 Aug 2004 8:33 AM I am the great-grandaughter of Richard V. Lindabury. I was quite surprised to find this piece on him but every detail is correct except it was Somerville, NJ and not Somerville, NY. I still live quite close to the family estate (no longer owned by the family) of Meadowbrook Farm in Bernardsville, NJ. Amy Lindabury Chalif Sumner blip@patmedia.net END From the Internet: BEGIN Richard Vliet Lindabury 1850-1925 Born: October 13, 1850 in New Jersey, United States Died: July 15, 1925 Occupation: Lawyer Source Database: Dictionary of American Biography BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY Lindabury, Richard Vliet (Oct. 13, 1850 - July 15, 1925), lawyer, was born on a farm near Peapack, Somerset County, N. J. His father, Jacob H. Lindabury, was of English descent while his mother, Mary Ann Vliet, was of Holland-Dutch parentage. His boyhood was spent in farm work and in rather irregular attendance at the district school. An apt pupil, he enlisted the interest of his teacher and through him of the local pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church with the result that the latter secured permission to teach the boy in preparation for Rutgers College and ultimately for the ministry. Thus some three years largely devoted to the evening study of Greek and Latin ensued. A serious illness which made the boy an invalid for two years prevented the consummation of these plans. In 1870, however, young Lindabury was offered the opportunity to take up the study of law in the office of Alvah A. Clark, of Somerville, N. J., a relative, and a former member of Congress. Supporting himself by teaching a local school he was able to be admitted to the bar in 1874 and opened an office in Bound Brook. In 1878 he moved to Elizabeth where he made his first and last effort to enter politics by seeking the post of city attorney, an effort which was unsuccessful. For several years Lindabury engaged in general practice. He was counsel for the Anti-Race-Track Gambling League and made speeches widely against gambling. Though a Democrat he opposed his party in this situation since he believed they had been corrupted by the gambling interests. In 1892 he defended the Singer Manufacturing Company against the payment of a tax from which the company claimed it was immune under its charter. Losing the case in the lower court he retained Joseph H. Choate to aid him on appeal and won the case in the court of errors and appeals. The next year the state's effort to collect the tax was renewed and again, with Choate's aid, he won a decision. This began his career as a corporation lawyer. His next important case was his defense of the American Tobacco Company against an action brought by the state of New Jersey to dissolve it as an illegal combination in restraint of trade. Choate, as counsel for the tobacco company, retained Lindabury as associate counsel and allowed him to handle the case on appeal. He won a significant victory which firmly established his reputation and brought him all the business he could manage. In 1896 Lindabury moved his office to Newark where he remained for the rest of his life. After two years alone he became senior partner of the firm of Lindabury, Depue & Faulks. His practice was tremendous in scope and lucrative in character. After his death one of the leaders of the bar said of him: "No other American lawyer ever represented and counseled so large an aggregate of capital investment as Lindabury represented and counseled" (Guthrie, post, p. 48). In 1905 he represented the Metropolitan and Prudential Life Insurance companies in the Armstrong investigation in New York. He headed the distinguished group of lawyers which defended the United States Steel Corporation against the dissolution suit brought against it by the federal government in 1911 and won a decisive victory in the Supreme Court' s decision in 1920 (251 U. S., 417). In 1912 and 1913 he appeared for J. P. Morgan and other financial interests before the Pujo committee in Congress which was investigating the so-called "money trust." Besides those mentioned he had as clients such business interests as the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, the Central Railroad of New Jersey, the International Harvester Company, the United States Rubber Company, Bethlehem Steel Company, American Sugar Refining Company, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and many others. Lindabury could never be persuaded to enter politics although he was many times sought by the leaders of his party for public office. Nor would he accept judicial appointment though this was twice tendered him. He was, however, a member of the New Jersey Palisades Interstate Park Board and a trustee of Stevens Institute of Technology. He retained an interest in farming and lived on a six-hundred-acre farm at Bernardsville, which he called "Meadowbrook" and which he operated on a paying basis. He was a tall handsome man, fond of riding and outdoor life. On July 8, 1892, he was married to Lillian (Van Saun) Dinger, who had one daughter and by whom he had a son and a daughter. He died from apoplexy after a fall from his horse. -- Robert E. Cushman FURTHER READINGS [Wm. D. Guthrie, "Richard V. Lindabury," Am. Bar Asso. Jour., Jan. 1926; Who's Who in America, 1924-25; N. J. Law Jour., Sept. 1925; the Jour. of Commerce (N. Y.) and N. Y. Times, July 16, 1925.] Source Citation: "Richard Vliet Lindabury."Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928-1936. Reproduced in History Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Group. http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/HistRC/ Document Number: BT2310008983 END Excerpts from "From Three Cents a Week" by William H. A. Carr in 1975: BEGIN [1902] .. .. The only beneficial thing that emerged from the furor was [John Fairfield] Dryden's discovery of a lawyer named Richard Vliet Lindabury of the firm of Lindabury, Depue & Faulks, which had offices in the Prudential Building. Lindabury, representing the minority stockholders of Pru, had obtained the injunction preventing Dryden from carrying through his Fidelity scheme as originally planned. Instead of being angry at Lindabury, Dryden decided he wanted a lawyer of such brilliance to represent him. It seems odd that Dryden had not already retained Lindabury, for he was the attorney who most often represented J. P. Morgan's interests in New Jersey--and elsewhere--and Dryden was very close to Morgan by this time. Of Dutch and English stock, Lindabury had grown up on a farm near Peapack in Somerset County, New Jersey. He had begun his law practice in the little town of Bound Brook, later moving to Elizabeth, which was still not the sort of place which one might expect a great corporation lawyer to spring. After serving as associate cousel with the famous attorney Joseph H. Choate in a case in which they represented the Singer Sewing Machine Company, Lindabury had come to the attention of Morgan and his associates. His successful defense of the American Tobacco Company, which had been charged by the New Jersey Attorney General with operating in restraint of trade, gave Lindabury national recognition. To Dryden, Lindabury seemed to be the sort of fellow a man would want to have on his side in a difficult legal fight. And that was the predicament that Dryden was about to find himself in because of one of his business allies. .. .. .. Richard V. Lindabury, the lawyer who had represented both the Prudential and the Metropolitan during the Armstrong hearings, had refused to give up his private practice to devote full time to the Prudential, but he had joined the board of directors and accepted appointment as chief counsel. According to tradition, it was Lindabury who first suggested to Dryden that he recruit Edward D. Duffield to organize the Pru's law department in 1906, on the retirement of Edgar Ward. .. .. Neither side was will to accept the compromise. Both sides appealed. Lindabury, that brilliant counsel who had turned down so many judgeships, told Dryden he was certain that the Prudential would win the appeal. But it was clear that the pressure from the stockholders for a greater share in the profits would never let up unless-- Unless the Prudential became a mutual company, Lindabury told Dryden. Unless the policyholders, the customers, owned the business. .. .. Duffield had particular need of D'Olier because the Pru had just lost the services of one of its most able advisers, Richard V. Lindabury. Still strong at 74, Lindabury had been in the custom of riding every morning at his 600-acre farm near Bernardsville. On July 15 his horse apparently threw him, and the fall killed Lindabury. END ancestry message board BEGIN Re: Richard V. Lindabury Susan_Heuck_Allen Posted: 01 Feb 2013 6:58 AM I have just written a book entitled Classical Spies:American Archaeologists with the OSS in World War II Greece. The main character, Rodney S Young's sister Alice married the son of your great grandfather Richard V Lindabury, who died in 1925. He bore the same name and worked with Young in the OSS, predecessor of the CIA. END century association biographical archive BEGIN Earliest Members of the Century Association View all members Richard V. Lindabury Lawyer Centurion, 1919–1925 Full Name Richard Vliet Lindabury Born 13 October 1850 in Bernardsville, New Jersey Died 15 July 1925 in Bernardsville, New Jersey Buried Saint Bernards Cemetery, Bernardsville, New Jersey Proposed by Charles Scribner and John G. Milburn Elected 1 November 1919 at age sixty-nine Archivist’s Note: Father of Richard Vliet Lindabury Century Memorial The career of a great lawyer, no less than the career of a great soldier or a great financier, is sometimes more deeply interesting for the use that it made of circumstance and opportunity than for the story of achieved success. Richard Vliet Lindabury was born in the State of New Jersey and lived there all his life. He came from the farm and from the life of the farm. Prevented by a prolonged attack of illness from realizing his original purpose of entering the ministry, he found himself at the age of eighteen in a country law office, studying for the bar. With only the old-fashioned training of the office, reading the elementary law books, earning the money to meet his expenses by teaching in the local school, he was admitted to the bar in 1874 and began the practice of his profession on the most humble scale. Fate and circumstance had selected for him not only the vocation suited to his talents, character and habits, but the place and opportunity in which his unusual professional qualities could have widest play. The conditions of that time were propitious to a lawyer of Lindabury’s dominant characteristics. It was an era of great expansion in corporate amalgamation. New Jersey had provided itself with a liberal system of corporate legislation which attracted the attention of the business world, and it thereby became the habitat of many corporations of the first magnitude. At the same time it was a period of alarm in the public mind over the immense development of company combination. Here was the beckoning hand for the alert, far-seeing, sagacious, resourceful, learned and constructive lawyer, not afraid of responsibility and heedless of the demands they made on time and energy. Those characteristics were the basis of Lindabury’s subsequent undisputed eminence at the bar. They made him a wise and safe adviser in the councils of business; an advocate in court who displayed the qualities of clear, forcible and compact exposition, concentrated on essentials, avoiding irrelevancies, and free from the dross of rhetoric. In the early days of the Anti-Trust Law, and by those business groups which used collectively to be known as Wall Street High Finance, an almost superstitious reverence attached to Lindabury’s opinion; not less so, certainly, from the fact that his judgment on a proposed corporate action never avoided or minimized the awkward legal obstacles. A story often repeated in the Wall Street of that day, possibly apocryphal but certainly characteristic, described a meeting of corporation magnates called to discuss a projected step greatly desired by the eminent financiers in conference but perplexingly close to the restrictions of the law. Lindabury had been summoned; if he would tell them how to circumvent the statute, all would be well. He was late in arriving and was immediately asked, with eagerness, what would be the result if the action should be taken. As the story had it, he reflected for a moment and then answered: “Not more than six months’ imprisonment.” Lindabury was a man of fine presence and winning personality, with attractive countenance and searching eye; ready in thought and action, alert in thrust and parry; drawing on humor sufficiently to lighten the scene without any loss of dignity. In personal intercourse he was agreeable and considerate, apt with anecdote and illustration, keen in appreciation of the wit and humor of others, a man of the world in the best sense. He was deeply interested in public affairs and at times took part in them to the extent of attending the councils of his party; presiding over its conventions, and making speeches on the real issues of a campaign. But, although often urged to run for high office, he always refused; his conviction was that his profession demanded uninterrupted and undivided allegiance. Alexander Dana Noyes 1926 Century Association Yearbook END