Norwich bulletin., 1913-04-25

formed all the duties and received an
 annual stipend of $50. MT. Shea is 1 therefore logically entitled to promo | ton. He was a lawyer with a heart l and did not pass judgment on cases l entirely for the money that would ac- ] crue in fines to the court. He has done much work that should have been done by Judge Arnold. who has | an office in Hartford. and was away | from the duties of the court every day. By this reason complaints were l frequent from officials who have busi- l ness with the police court. MT. Shea
 now asks for promotion, and MT. Ly- man said his many friends believed he l was entitled to it.
 Attorney George E. Hinman appear 1 ed in the interests of Judge Arnold. who had been the faithful and efficient judge for the past ten years. and if the committee gives consideration to the sentiment of the business and pro fessional men of Willimantic he will | be retained. There is no just cause for removal. He is a lawyer of stand ing and ability and conducted the court with decorum and to the satis- faction of all MT. Hinman repeated that there was no good cause for
 change and the only reason that could be advanced was that some other fel- low wanted the position. and he could not see any reason why the commit tee should recommend a change.
 Representative Avery of Groton ask ed if the other candidates were not lawyers of ability and citizens of good standing.
 Mir. Hinman said he had nothing to say against them, but he favored the retention of Judge Arnold.
 Attorney William A. King endorsed all that had been said by MT. Hinman. He said Judge Arnold stands well in citizenship man of first class at tainments and an able lawyer. He had served as judge for ten years with honor to the court. the city and him. self and that should be c1assed as a good cause for retention. He had nothing to say against the others, for they were good men, but the Sentl- ment in Willimantic was for the re- tention of Judge Arnold.
 Representative Avery stated that his reason for asking the question was that if there were objections the place to make them was in open hearing and not in the corridors.
 MT. King replied that all three are men of character and ability, but he endorsed the appointment of Judge Arnold III three are lawyers of abili- ty, and two of them. MT. King said, studied law in his office.
 MT. Avery retorted then they surely know some law.
 Others who were recorded as favor able to the appointment of Judge Ar hold were Henry T. Burr Charles F. Risedorf and Walter c. Norris in per son and William D. Grant and F'reder- ick B. Jordan by letter
 A. D. Lyman again addressed the committee in behalf of MT. Shea. He said that Judge Arnold's place of busi- ness was in Hartford and that those familiar with the court were best to judge of the conduct. He doubted if any of those who appeared for MT. Ar mold had been in his court. or in close touch with him as an official. over half dozen times in the past ten years Of all officials who have to do with the court he did not know of one who favored the retention of Judge Ar mold. He said the charter requires that court shall be held every morn ing at 9 o'clock. Witnesses are there. but no judge. and the accused have to remain in cells while the judge is on his way to Hartford. and await his pleasure the next day. He said MT Arnold had refused to come to court