Judge Allen C. Adsit was born at Rutland, Jefferson County, NY on 20 February 1837. His father, Stephen Adsit, was of English descent and a native of New York; his mother, Polly Smiley, was of Scotch-Irish descent and also a native of New York, and both were descendants of Revolutionary sires. On his father’s side he is descended from one John Adsit, who came from England and settled at Lyme, CT in 1716. He had four sons: John, Samuel, Benjamin and Stephen, all of whom settled in Dutchess, and what is now, Columbia county, NY, prior to the Revolutionary war, and were enrolled as soldiers in the state militia. John, 2^nd, from whom the subject is descended, was a private in the Eighth Albany militia. There were eight of the family who served in the American army during that contest.

The early education of the subject was received at the district school near his father’s farm at Fairfield seminary, and at Jefferson County institute at Watertown, NY. He passed through an academic course in school, and during the winters of 1857-1859 was employed at teaching in the district schools. The remaining portion of the year was spent in studying law at Watertown. He was admitted to the bar at a general term of the supreme court held at Syracuse, 6 October 1859, and settled at Adams, in his native state, to engage in practice in 1860.

The eve of the most exciting period of the century’s history was not an auspicious time for a young man to establish himself in professional life. Already the country was stirred by the premonitory signs of civil war. The sectional feeling was intense. The disruption of the democratic party in the national convention at Charleston, which had already been accomplished, was only the prelude to open hostilities for the dismemberment of the Union, upon the election of a president on what the south regarded as sectional issues. It was indeed a year freighted with alarming incidents and momentous consequences. Under such circumstances a young man, who had barely attained his majority, might reasonably be pardoned for failing to make a permanent impression upon jurisprudence and a permanent place for himself in the profession within a few months.

Mr. Adsit had scarcely time to nail up his shingle and form the acquaintance of half a dozen clients before the overt act of rebellion thrilled the country. The first call of the president for volunteers appealed to his patriotism. He laid aside the law books and shouldered a musket. Personal comfort, professional ambition and self-interest could not be weighed against the duty of the hour. Without stopping to consider the hardships, the danger or the influence upon his own future, he offered his humble services as a private soldiers, and was mustered into the military forces of the United States as a member of companyG, Forty-fourth New York infantry; from that time until the Civil war closed the duties of a soldier were paramount to the business or the professional engagements of a citizen. He served honorably and faithfully with the army of the Potomac, participating in all of the principal engagements of that army, as well as the minor battles and skirmishes. He was at the siege of Yorktown, in the seven days’ fighting before Richmond, at second Bull Run, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, and all of the intervening minor engagements. By successive promotions on merit he attained the rank of first lieutenant, and was mustered out as such, with the same company in which he entered the service as a private.

The five years of war had served to efface the impression which he had made upon the law, and to obscure the impression which the law had made upon himself. On returning home it was difficult for him to find his place and engage in practice. The broken threads which an old practitioner would have gathered up were wanting in his case. He had no time to spin these threads, or weave any fabric before entering the service of his country. To return to his profession was to begin de novo.

In the early part of 1866 he removed to Michigan, and settled at Spring Lake, Ottawa county, where he engaged in mercantile pursuits. Soon afterwards he became interested in politics. For six years he was supervisor of the township. In 1871 he was president of the village. In 1871 and 1872 he represented his district in the state legislature. In the meantime he had renewed his interest in the law and resumed practice. In 1874 he was elected prosecuting attorney for Ottawa county, and two years later was an unsuccessful candidate for the office of probate judge. During all this period he was growing in knowledge of the law and increasing his practice.

In 1877 he removed to Grand Rapids for the purpose of devoting all of his time and energies to the profession. He soon established himself and won success at the bar. In 1886 he was appointed assistant United States attorney for the western district of Michigan, and in 1887 was the unsuccessful candidate of his party for circuit judge.

By appointment of the mayor, in 1890, he served a term as member of the board of public works. Later in the same year he was elected for the residue of the judicial term of Marsden C. Burch, judge of the seventeenth circuit. This election, however, was contested upon legal points, in the supreme court, and forms a leading case which is reported in 84 Mich.420. This case was conducted and argued in the supreme court by him in person. His contention of the law was sustained and he assumed the duties of the office 5 February, 1891. His judicial record was approved by re-election in 1893 for the full term of six years. He was again a candidate for re-election at the spring election of 1899 on the democratic ticket, and notwithstanding the fact the he ran upward of one thousand ahead of other candidates on the ticket, he was defeated.

Judge Adsit’s individuality is marked. His life has been full of experiences, as varied as any man could wish. The trials of a soldier in the field, the life of a successful merchant, the experience of a lawmaker, the administration of the office of public prosecutor and the judicial duties of a court of record have combined to make a strong man. His mental powers are permitted to work though a physical organism that is well nigh perfect, and his life is guided by the strictest principles of morality in the judicial office, as in private life; he is always the courteous gentleman, regardful of the rights of others. He has the intuitions of a lawyer; is quick to discover the marrow of a subject, and quick to rule on a motion or decide on the admissibility of evidence. When a decision is once reached it is not altered, except upon the most convincing proof that it was erroneous. Pride of opinion is not permitted to stand in the way of a change when his judgment is convinced of error.

His mental discipline is not inferior to the physical discipline incident to military training, so that his judicial opinion is pronounced with precision and terseness. He is not arbitrary, but altogether reasonable in his decisions, and their correctness is attested by the approval of the supreme court, in nearly all cases appealed to that tribunal from his circuit. Two of the most celebrated of these cases are Haines v. Hayden, 95 Mich.332, and in re Leonard, 95 Mich. 295.

He is hones, patient, sincere, and his record on the bench commends him to the bar. He is an active member of Custer Post, No. 5, G. A. R., department of Michigan; a member of Grand River lodge, No. 34, F. & A.M.; of DeMolai commandery, No.5 , Knight Templar, and of Saladin temple, Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, and enjoys the esteem as well as the confidence of the community.

In religion he is of the liberal faith. He attends and aids liberally in the support of the society of All Soul’s church. He was married in 1871 at Spring Lake to Mary Hubbell, who died the following year. On 24 February 1886, he was married to Sarah Kilpatrick of Grand Rapids. A prominent member of the Grand Rapids bar contributes the following:

"It is said that in this land of liberty, where the greatest latitude is allowed for the exercise of individual endeavor, everyone is the architect of his own future, and with great truth it may be said that everyone is the architect of his own character. Character is the edifice in which dwells the oral entity called self. It is made up of individual traits, and is modeled and fashioned by the will of its possessor. As whatever of prominence as a citizen, as a soldier, as a legislator, as a jurist, Judge Adsit has attained, was from the individual exertion and application of his own efforts, so by hi integrity, his ability, his industry, he has established a character in the community where he is known, which adds luster to his renown, and commands the respect of everyone. He is genial in his disposition and social in his tastes. His greatest pleasure is derived from his home surroundings. His impartiality on the bench has merited the confidence of the bar and the respect of litigants. Not hasty to reach conclusions, he gives due consideration to all arguments advanced, and arrives at results by the aid of strong common sense, of which he possesses a full measure. In the administration of justice he is firm, but not arrogant; decisive without being opinionated, and conscientious in the discharged of every duty. His re-nomination and re-election at the close of his first term voices the confidence of the people in his integrity and judicial ability. Such endorsement is the most flattering meed of praise a judge can be recipient of. A high, a happy and ennobling future opens before him, inviting him to a career of usefulness and honor, which his friends sincerely wish he may long live to enjoy.

He retired from the bench January 1, 1900, with the respect of all and the regret of the members of the bar generally.