A Sensation In Court

In Judge Jameaon'a Criminal Court, 3-e'lills Mini his objcctions to the motion made by WS.JnImounsi'l for tbe defenae, fcr a change ttOe in the ca of Vrthur Stern, the murderer. lic commenood reading 0W8 f rom tin1 Kcvi.-oil Statutes: "No appllcation Cor ñ change of venne made iittcr the Brst term ibal] be allowed unless tl; appltcant tball have ji vento the State! Attorncy at lc:ist ten days' previoua notice of his lotentlOD ii make inch applloitlon, i wtere the oauset hare artsen, icome to the koowledjte of the applloant, witliin leas tlian ten daj s before the maklns of tbe appHcatlon." Mr. Mills theo sakl tbal the Ittdlctoent In thto oase had been returned ilurinjr the Iaat term, on t of October, aod that be had only bea Dotifled of the Intention of the priaónei to npply for a change of Tenue al one o'clock p. in. on Saturday, Oct. Í9. Mr. MilN said nothlng In the pctltlon of tlio ner, oor In tbe affldavlu whlcb aocoinpaiiiod il, to show that the koowledge oe to the aplate aa u ithi'i teadaya before the lime o 01 l.i int applicaUon, and .- be (ilüla) maintalned iliat ilic petitloner ili'l nol bring bJmaelf witliin tbe proriaioni of the atatute, and his applicatlo'i could not be enterUined. Tht State's Attorncy also preentcd tlu: affldaviteot elght well-known aml refutable citizens of Cblcatfo and Cook count.v. saetí of wliom swore thnt he liad heard and read of the intmler without fbrming mcb an opinión oí the prlsoner's gullt as would prevent him from ivinp the prisoner a fair and impartial trial on the evidence. Mr. HllLs conciudad by sayinj? that the inain ({round of hls objection vu the failure of the prisoner to serve dne notice upon him M provided by the statute. The eoart tiien overruled the motion for a chance of venue from Cook county. Tberettpon Mr. Johnson, for thedei' 1 sotnetliing of a sensation by moring for a cliange of venue from this court (Judge Jameson) and irom Judge Tutey, of the branch of the criminal court, alletfing that both were prejudioed as to th8 case. The motiou was gupported by the affldavits of Walter W. Chamberlain, of 17U WabMb :ivi'!iue, who swore that tin y beüeved Judges Jameson and Tuley to be so prejudiced against the prisoner that they could not give him a fair and impartial trial. Mr. Mills said it was the same oíd story - an attempt to gain delay - and that he had 110 commenU to make upon it. Judge Jameson remarked that the petltion was in eonformity wlth the statute and said: "The State of Illinois has seen fit, for sufllcient reason, to provide for chaiiffe of venue on account of the prejudice of judges. It is very de$irable that tlns ri'ht shatl not be weakencd, and that no impediment shall be put In the wny of uch motions. There are cases, however, wliers the affidavits in support of inch niotions are known to tlie pruoner, to hit ooudmI, and to the court to be false, and these proceedings are well known as reeorts to secure delays. In all my long experience on the benen I never bd -uch an application come to me where I was personully aequainted with eitlu r the irisoner or the alndavite. In l h---cases the affldavite were mere perjiiii-. The practice is most disreputable la tlw prisoner, to the counsel, and to the szceedingly reputable persons making the allí Invita. It is, inorcover, prejudicial to the (miiíc of justice in Cook county?" The Judge said he did not apply tUwe remarksto this particular case. In mr-Ii cases, however, the trutli ought to be told. The public will judge whether this sort of thin; ought to continue or whether the intcnU of justice require that this extreme latitude be allowed to secure delav s. "In this case," said the court," not one of the exceedinirlv reoutable persons who made the affldavite are know to me, nor liave I ever before heard of Stern or the offense of homicide alleged against hlin. I apply none of my remarks to this particular caso, simply st.'Uing the facts and leavinjr the apiilication to be made by the public." Tlie motkm was allowed, and it was annouced during tlie afternoon tliat Jtidfe (innlner wou íd try tne ca.e. coiiiincncinj; Wednesday nioring. Mr. Johnson's great object was to ttavc the trial off until Judre JHaMon'i period in the criminal court expired- threc treek henee - but, as seen, it was defeated. If Jndge Cooley, ex-Judge Huntington and Uieiradhereuts will carcfully re:ul and digest the above article taken from the ínter Ocean of November 3, 1881, thoy may learn gomethin;. The laws of Illinois compelled these Chicago jndges to abandon this caee - there is no doubt but that their own manhood would have done so. Tlie laws of tin of Michigan should be like those of Illinois in this respect, then there would be somt: protection against prejndlced and cold heartcd vindictive judges. If our state laws had been like those of Illinois, Cooley and Huntington would not havedisgraccd tliemselves as they did in the Rose üooglas case by dolng that, for which no precedent can be found In the law books of this country or of auy other.