New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-02-01
THE IVES AND HAZARD CONTROVERSY
IN RHODE ISLAND.


"he worst Kind Of Injustice 10 that which Is inflicted In the
oftbe law"
To lAs EssiO, u TAeE y TStbsat
SIR: Little things are great to little men, and 10
the controversy indicated above, though OF little '@por
lance 10 the Union at large, wears different aspect Id
the eyes of the people Of Rhode Island Ia their vieT
the merits of the case are not confined 70 tue ieg
rights of the parties 10 the suit but they hold that rules
are souoht 10 be established by the Court that ~'uid
deprive the General ssembiy OF most Important
right that was conferred upon il for the especiai pro-
tecion of the people, and which that body has ever
habituay exercised from early colonial times down 70
the ne,od Of the decision of this Gaze Of Ives versus
Hazard. If, too, as il alleged, these arbitrary pro-
ceedinos were first inaueurated by the Chief Justice
exactly at the epoch that would TO meet certain
exgenees of great moment both to the Court ana the
successful litgant in the case in which he himself had
iust otciated az senior COUNSEL IL neei not be won
dered at that the people Of the little state should re-
gard the affair With INV 0Ded interest.
The battle in Rhode Island is virtually between the
farmers and great macs people on the side, and
the Supreme Court the lawyers, and the incorporated
wealth on the other; and it will readily be perceived
that in small community like Rhode Island, an enor-
mons proportion of whose wealth and business is
buoed in manu- factories and Incorporated Institutions
nearly mOety of the population OF the State IN the
former must have fearful ODDS TO contend WITH IN their
efforts to maintain their rights, especially when the
preservation Of there IL dependent upon tue action oil
body Of men who, after beng subjected ~ all tue cor
ripping influences that be brought TO bear on their
elections have 10 undergo still more hery ordeal, by
being brought in daily and hourly contact during their
deliberations with tue deceptive and seductive, onclal
lnoled and social influences OF great city. H. III
de ed the experienced fathers Of American liberty
deemed It essential TO the public welfare that the de-
Lberstlons of Congress should be removed from the
CORFU ting atmosphere Of cities containing scarce an
hundredlh part Of the pulaton OF the whole couary
II is pajn at the mminence Of the peril ~ which the
comnonalty of the people Of Rhode Island are sub
iected from lii sources, cannot be exaggerated.
AS a citizen of Rhode Island, allied to none OF the
parties by any recognized tie of family or other rell-
ionship and claiming to be actuated by no other mo-
lives than regard for hight, and justice, and the
public good, l AK the privilege OF Inserting lew
remarks IN your columns, in regard 10 what deem 70
be some of fact that appeared in the editorial
columns of TIE TRIBUNE last April and Nay.
The people Of Rhode Island 6re there queried with
whether they " will gain ytbing by upsettng the
Supreme Court, and making the Assembly the arena
" of law suits !" -,
In answer il may be said that the people Of Rhode
Island do not emp late dong e her, but they DO
not mean 10 permit the Court TO tfample upoa tue
rights of he Assembly, in the matter Of ts hitherto
unquesoDed ght Of gra lngn trials, ana lhus an
nibiate the only sem6lance OF Court OF Errors or
Appeals that exists in the State, Leaving the rights ana
proper1y Of the people subject 10 the mere ,DSe dLH
of two or four fable men az the may be- who,
either in their individual collective capacity constl-
tnte the whole Judiciary of the State, and whose err
rors or encrOacbments, it s claimed, are only 70 De
reached through the mpractcabe process oil lmpe4ch-
ment - %.
It's true as The TRIBUNE says, that the Constitu'
ton instituted in Rhode Island in 1913 CLASHES Sue
power Of Government into Executive, Legislative,
and Judicial, the came az 1t was administered uuoer
nj ~ hat q.
also true that the Constitution contains clause re-
"serypR 10 the Assembly oil the powers possessed ey
that body under the old Charter" among which was
the power " to alter, revoke annu or PARDON under
the common seal, OF otherwise, sucn mes, 9inlcs'
imprisonments sentences, judgments, and condemna-
tons az shall be thought ht, and TO direct rule,
order and dispose OF all other matters anu things
&c" The Constitution establishes one Supreme
Court, to have the same Jursdcti IN as the supreme
MSe pfescf aRbtsd q Pas s
the people of Rhode leland hold that the import Of
such language this ID TOO PLAIN TO be mtsappre
heuded and have been looking about them for some
more probable csuse for its attempted perverson by
the Court Than what appears on the surface. lhey
have been told by the Hon. james r. Simmons, who
is called the Father OF the constitution OF Rhode
Island from his active parcpat on IN the proceedlng
of The Con geniiOD that framed it, that the claims sol
ND BY tie Court are utterly without foundation, aud
they have learned that motions were made IN the Con-
yenOn 10 render the Court indie pendent OF the Assem-
also learned that erery member of the present Court
was not only member Of the said Con sention bat
that they were also all members Of the Assembly in
1874 that revised the laws 10 meet the requirements
of he Constitution, and that among these is statute.
preecrbng the form Of petitions asking for new trials
and how they shal be preferred to che General Assem-
bly, They find that the Chief Justice of the Court as
Counsel has himself until recently been in the prac-
tice of aiding petitions for new trials before the AS
sembly, and that up TO very recent period,
the Court itself has not Ouly always recognized,
by its action, the rights of the General Assembly
10 grant trials but also that II has ever admitted
its cous uODa right 70 do in the case OF Thomas
W. Dorr decided June, 1854. They have learned fur
tber that il was not until after the decision 10 the
of Ives against Hazard thai the rights oil the General
Assembly 10 exercise this power ever questioned,
from any quarter either in out OF Court. The true
nature Of this care il but little known out Of the State
of Rhode leland, ana cannot be learned ou OF any OH
cal record short of the papers file in the Office OF
she Clerk of the Court. IL is doubtful whether in vie "
of the real facts and evidence that such decision as
the one pronounced could have been obtained from
any judicial tribunal out of Rhode Island in the world
beside. No was it noised about that an iite-
rate man. under the implied threat Of coniscaion aud
imprisonment 10 be compelled contrary 10 an ex-
pr 50 law of the State 10 deed his farm worth from
SlC0 to 1925 00O TO the weathiest in the State
for less than $4,000, by virtue OF memorandum,
signed by one party only, utterly ilegbe that it
can be sbewn past denial that the Cont itself has mis-
Interpreted Of its most important etipuations,
attended with other and manifold axgravating crcum-
stances, than omnous mutterDgs came up before the
Court the successful party, and his counsel from all
pats of the State and warned them that appeal to
The General Assembly for new and Jury trial
would soon follow. The people of Rhode Issnd had
previously noted that just as the peadngs were all
through in the case and decision of Court daily
expected that the then ChefJustce of the State bad
suddenly, without prolouncing any decision,
retired from the bench, and given place
at its head to an associate Judge, who how
- h. Al
ignorant of Chancery proceedings, ADD whose family
moreover, as is alleged, had been laid under many
obligations 10 the compliments in the case 1t was
now again noted that this second Chief Justice,
a, ,ba IN, IA