The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1904-10-28
ATTACKED
RECORD OF
Mr.. ST|NESS

Last evening in Benedict hall on Gran
ston street. James A Williams. a prac-
ticing attorney of this city. created a
sensation by carrying out his threat OF
a fortnight ago and delivering an ar
raignrnent OF Chief Justice Stiness In
which he argued the improprietsv OF the
judges candidacy for congress in the
First district.
The attack against the record OF Mr..
stiness which Mr.. Williams made In the
hope of convincing his hearers that the
chief Justice Is undesirable as a public
servant was directed. against the atti-
tude of Mr.. Stiness towards the trusts.
Several cases were cited IN which de,
cisions unfavorable to corporations have
been aAe-tff-tfte-fower courts. only 10
meet with overruling or reversion by the
appellate division OF the supreme court
under Judge Stiness,
The major portion OF "A lengthy address
was devoted by Mr. Williams. TO the
analysis and criticism of the record of
Mr.. Stiness during his service al the head
of Rhode Islands judiciary
The most salient passages in Mr.. Will
liams' address were as follows:
Mr. WILLIAMS ADDRESS.
"As Judge Stiness has already issued
his letter OF acceptance, in which he
claims as | expected he would friend
ship for the masses, and as II has be-
come apparent that he does not intend
to lay aside his judicial robes until the
result OF the election is known, ! do not
see any improperly in my discussing the
candidacy of Judge Suness and his claim
upon the voters OF this district l am
well aware OF the fact that certain OF
the subsidized newspapers In this state
will raise a hue and cry against me and
charge that am assaillng the supreme
court of the state in what / have To say
about the Republican candidate for con-
gress. but l will not permit u be for
gotten that this same SUBSIDIZED press
has bitterly and indecently assailed
branch OF our state government Which Is
coordinate with the courts OF the state
viz, the executive department But WhHe
! shall keep safely within my rights as
"a citizen and within the bounds OF de-
cency and propriety. / shall not hesitate
10 point out "A dangerous precedent whicn
has been established by our appellate
court under the administration or Chiet
Justice Stinsss-a precedent ana a prac-
tice which directly antagonizes the In
terests and the rights OF the people IN
q most important particular.
MOI ABON Il IN iSAP-"
"I hold that no department of our gov.
ernment Is too sacred for crilclsn
inst cause for criticism arises, and l be-
Ieve that the appearance OF Judge sti-
ness before the people affords an opportu-
nifty which otherwise would not nave pre-
sented itself at this time 10 can stlehtioh
70 what members of the bar OF Hhoue Is
land believe 10 be a most deploraole ten
dencv in the appellate division or the
supreme court 10 usurp the functions anu
the rights OF trial by jury.
notwithstanding the fact that our jury
trials are conducted with great care ana
eminent fairness, the appellate division OF
our supreme court. under the chiei JUS
ticeshlp Of John II. Stiness. has within
the past four years overrioden the YER
diets OF turies in large number OF cases
in which juries have returned verdicts In
favor OF the pTaInt1rrs. In the cases which
shall refer to I'm q few moments, large
verdicts were rendered by turies In favor
of the plaintiff, and in every case upon
petition for new trials by defendants IN
those cases the court has not only scr
aside the verdicts rendered by the Jurles,
but has gone still further and ordered
judgments entered in behalf of the de-
PENDANTS in such cases.
A NEW DOCTRINE.
"The right of this court to grant new
trials and send cases back TO be tried
again has never been and Is not now dis
ruted hut IL is a new doctrine in Rhode
island, that after a case has gone TO the
Jury and the jury has returned verdict
thereon upon the evidence submitted, that
the court should set the verdict aside and
peremptorily terminate the case forever
by ordering judgment for the contrary
party Juries have always been In TINS
state the sole Judges OF the facts submit
ted 10 them and when they have passed
upon the facts no court has the right to
overrule them and set itself up as bet
ter hnal arbiter of the facts. This danger
Gus and unwaranted practice on the part
OF our appellate court is OF recent origin,
but of rapid growth.
JUDICIARY RIGHTS.
"Tho judiciary act. already referred to,
gave TO the appellate division the dis
erection TO order judgment on special- YER
diets upon petition thereof, but IL can
scarcely be believed that IL was the In
tention of the legislature TO give the
appellate court the broad discretion which
Il has used In the cases which / shall
soon cite In those cases the appellate
court has ordered judgments entered for
the defendants for entry OF judgments
in their behalf but upon petitions for new
trials. In other words. the defendants
attorneys have petitioned for new trials,
but have received more than they asked
for and more than they expected at the
hands OF the court, viz. Judgments for
the defendants. thus forever putting an