In 1851 he was married to Miss Arabella Emiline Speairs, daughter of Mr. Leonard Daniel Speairs, of Cumberland County, who was his devoted companion through life and only survived him a few weeks. Of this union there are seven children: Pembroke Pettit, of Fluvanna; Mrs. N. C. Harris, of Louisa; Dr. W. B. Pettit, of Buckingham; Miss Vera Pettit, of Fluvanna; Leonard O. Pettit, of Wise County; Paul Pettit, of Fluvanna, and Mrs. William Bugbee, of Fluvanna.

On the outbreak of the war in 1861, Mr. Pettit at once volunteered as a private; arose to the rank of first lieutenant and served till the close of the war. The "old folks at home" in 1864 elected him Commonwealth's Attorney, an office which he held until 1872; and, with the exception of the war, he was a lawyer in active practice to the time of his last illness, which came upon him some months prior to his death.

Some twenty-five years ago he entered into partnership in the practice of the law with Judge Andrew K. Leake, of Goochland, and it will be no disparagement to other practitioners to say that for most of the time since, the firm of Pettit & Leake has been on one side or the other of most of the important cases in Fluvanna, Goochland and Louisa counties.

He was often spoken of by the members of the bar at which he practiced as an excellent man for Judge of the Circuit Court or of the Court of Appeals, but he never became a candidate but once. That was for Judge of the Circuit in which he lived, and he came within a few votes of being elected. He joined this association at its second session in 1889, and was elected its President in 1897, seven out of the ten of those who preceded him in the office, Judge Robertson, Mr. Kean, Judge Burks, Mr. Tucker, Judge Staples, Captain Blackford and Mr. Henry, having already passed away.

He never was an office seeker. Although he attained a rank at the bar that for a third of a century gave him distinction over a large portion of the State, his tastes kept him in the pursuits of his profession untempted by the honors of political office. But when good lawyers and best citizens were sought for the Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1901-02, he had to yield to the wishes of his fellow citizens and consent to represent them,

as he did in the election district composed of the counties of Goochland and Fluvanna.

The Convention was composed of the best talent of the Commonwealth; men selected as candidates and then elected by the people because they were distinguished for learning, ability and experience in State affairs. It is history that the Convention of '29-'30 had in it more famous men than any body ever gathered together in the State, but the members of the Convention of 1901-02 were equally as well fitted for the task in hand. Mr. Pettit was one of the oldest, and was honored as such by being made Chairman pro tem. His course in the Convention was marked by extreme conservatism. He believed in keeping in force laws and traditions that had been a long time in existence unless the reason for a change was manifest. change was manifest. Some wished to strike down the preamble of and much of the substance of the Bill of Rights as having now become obsolete. But he clung tenaciously to every word of it and fought successfully to maintain it in its original form. His usefulness in the Convention was, however, interrupted by failing health and an illness came on him while there, from which he never afterwards fully recovered.

When one comes to give expression to the estimate which he places upon the character and attainments of such a man, he naturally fears that what he may say or write will not do the subject justice; my embarrassment in this particular is much relieved by the wealth of material which I discover in a sketch of Mr. Pettit, written for the Virginia Law Register (May number, 1905) by Judge Leake, formerly his law partner, who out of his admiration for and intimate knowledge of Mr. Pettit, has contributed a most comprehensive and discriminating review of his career and character.

Says Judge Leake:

"Laymen often criticise the members of the bar for what they regard as fulsome encomiums upon dead members of the profession. It may be that there have been instances where such panegyrics were not deserved; but the experience of the profession will show that such is rarely the case. The eulogy here passed upon the life and character of William B. Pettit will be

corroborated by indisputable evidence, of the dead as well as the living, given by men who knew him best.

"Some years ago a number of friends and admirers determined to make an effort to have him elevated to the bench, and prevailed upon him to allow them to use his name. Of the many testimonials of his worth laid before the General Assembly we will select three, because of the well known character and standing of the gentlemen who gave them, and because they are elegant samples of those which were eagerly proffered.

66

Among them was one from the late John H. Guy, himself one of the most gifted and brilliant lawyers Virginia has ever produced, as well as one of the best, purest and most charming of men. In regard to Mr. Pettit's fitness for judicial office, Col. Guy wrote:

66

" "I think I have in view all the qualifications which that high office calls for, when I say that Mr. Pettit lacks none of them. Those that come under the head of character, those that come under the head of attainments, both in the law and that general knowledge which is essential to its application, those that contribute to make efficient industry, and those that must unite and harmonize in the formation of sound judgment, all combine in him to a very unusual degree.'

"Another was written by the late William S. Barton, Judge of the Tenth Judicial Circuit of Virginia, and a member of the late Special Court of Appeals, an able and learned Judge, and a man of lofty character, who said:

66

"I have a great regard for Mr. Pettit personally, and a high admiration for him professionally. He is admirably well qualified in all respects for the position, and it would be well for the State if she could have such men as he is in her judicial positions.'

"Another was from Frank V. Winston, Esq., of Louisa, well known in the State, who is still living, though he has abandoned the practice of his profession, to spend his declining years in that retirement to which a long, most useful and successful life of active work entitles him. Like Col. Guy, Mr. Winston had practiced with Mr. Pettit in the courts of the same circuits from a period commencing some years before the Civil War. He said of Mr. Pettit:

66

"I never met a gentleman of higher character and purer life, nor a lawyer of sounder judgment or more solid attainments.'

"What a striking illustration of multum in parvo.

"The writer was the law partner of Mr. Pettit for twentyodd years, practicing with him, principally, in the counties of Goochland, Louisa and Fluvanna, possessing opportunities of knowing him more intimately than any one outside of his immediate family.

"Even more, much more, to his lasting credit and honor, must, to do him justice, be said of him that has already been written.

"He was, at all times and in all places, under all circumstances, the thorough, old-time gentleman, incapable of any act which did not measure up to the highest standard of honor, or the ethics of his profession. No word ever escaped his lips that might not have been uttered by a refined gentleman. He never indulged in harsh criticism, but was ever ready to extenuate the faults of others. He was uniformly polite and deferential, and while entirely free from what is called "mannerism,” he was the soul of courtesy, and was amiable and affectionate in his disposition; and in all respects a most lovely man. He was so in all his relations with his fellow man, and it was a pleasure for a stranger to enter his hospitable home, and behold the beauty of the unrestrained intercourse between parents and children. It would be difficult, without consuming too much space in an article as limited as this must necessarily be, to name, without making some invidious distinction, the famous lawyers with whom he came in contact in the courts in which he practiced, but the list embraced such men who are dead as William J. Robertson, Peachy R. Grattan, Egbert R. Watson, Shelton F. Leake, Richard Ivanhoe Cocke, and others of equal renown.”

And among those others of "equal renown" may be mentioned the Judge's own father, Mr. Walter D. Leake, a leading lawyer and honored citizen of Goochland County for years. Besides his practice in the County and Circuit Courts, Mr. Pettit frequently appeared in the Supreme Court of Appeals. Perhaps his most celebrated case there was Moon vs. Stone,

(19 Grat.), in which he maintained himself with credit against that most learned of Virginia lawyers, Mr. William Green, the questions in the case involving the abstruse subject of contingent remainders and executory devises. I again quote from Judge Leake:

"The abilities of Mr. Pettit may be more properly estimated when it is considered that he had, to start with, none of the advantages which are the incidents of wealth, or influential connections, or of collegiate education; yet by the strength and force of native ability and character, he became not only a profound and learned lawyer and able advocate, but an accomplished classical scholar, as well as a forceful and elegant writer, although he seldom indulged in this latter accomplishment outside of his professional work.

"An apt illustration of these attainments may be found in a leading article, a gem of its kind, written by him in 1897, and published in 3 Virginia Law Register, p. 81, in which he dissented from the opinion of the Supreme Court of Appeals in the case of Sulphur Mines Co. vs. Thompson, 93 Virginia 293. This case was decided upon extremely narrow and technical grounds, requiring proof of the recitals of a deed recorded more than sixty years before—a requirement, in the nature of things, practically out of the question. The article of Mr. Pettit was one of the chief factors which induced the next General Assembly to enact a law reversing the rule laid down by the Court in the above styled case, which act is now 3344a of Pollard's Code.

"Again, at the meeting of the State Bar Association at Old Point in 1892, and at the White Sulphur Springs in 1893, occurred a memorable discussion of the then much agitated subject of 'Law Reform.' Radical changes were proposed in the law, especially with regard to pleading, and among others who advocated such changes were the late John Randolph Tucker and Robert T. Barton, Esq., of Winchester, and their principal opponent was William B. Pettit. That Mr. Pettit more than held his own against these intellectual giants seems to have been generally conceded by those who heard the discussion, or who have read the proceedings of the meetings.