Judge Martin’s mind was one of peculiar lucidity and extraordinary vigor; its capacity to acquire, analyze, and apply was quite equal to that of the great Marshall; its power of condensation was superior to either of his compeers, while its capacity for application was never surpassed.  It had been trained to close and continuous thought, and so long had this habit been indulged that it had become nature with him.  His phlegmatic temperament relieved him from anything like impulsiveness in thought or action; all work with him was considerately approached and assiduously performed.  His habits were temperate to austerity, and his mode of life penuriously mean; but, as said of another judge, this may have been the result of habit growing from extreme necessity—­though the same characteristics were conspicuous in his brother:  like the Judge, he was unmarried, and, though but little younger, was always spoken to and spoken of as his boy-brother.  Like his confrere, he remained upon the Bench until he died, which was in extreme old age.

It has been asserted by some that Judge Martin soiled his reputation in his will.  It was a very simple and brief will, giving all he possessed to his brother, and was autographic—­that is, written in his own hand, and signed, dated, and sealed up, and upon the back of the document written, “This is my autographic will,” and this signed with his own proper hand.  Such a will is almost impervious to attack under the laws of Louisiana.

The law of Louisiana levies a tax of ten per cent, upon all estates or legacies made to leave the State for foreign countries.  The brother of Judge Martin, as soon as his will was administered and the proceeds of his estate were in hand, left the United States for France, carrying with him three hundred thousand dollars, the entire amount of which the Judge died possessed; and it was subsequently ascertained that he had left written instructions with his brother to dispose among his European relatives this sum in obedience to this secret letter of instructions.  This was considered as his will proper; and it was contended that the transaction was a fraud, to deprive the State of the legal percentage upon the amount going out of the country.  An attempt was made to recover this amount from his executor, but failed; and the attorney for the State was rebuked by the Supreme Court for attempting an imputation dishonorable to the character of the deceased Judge—­a legacy bequeathed to the State, in the distinguished services rendered to her by him and through so many years of his life.  The facts are as stated.  It is true, the will was a clear bequest of all his estate to his brother, a resident of the State, and the memorandum a mere request, and this might have been destroyed or disobeyed with impunity.  The will alone was the authoritative disposition of his estate; the brother claimed under this, and the property once in his possession, it was his to dispose of at pleasure.