Sacramento County
Biographies
The judiciary of the Sacramento Valley suffered
an irreparable loss in the death of the late Joseph W. Hughes, who for eighteen
years served on the bench of the superior court of Sacramento county, and whose
death occurred on March 25, 1914. During nearly two decades of judicial
service, Judge Hughes exemplified to the highest degree those qualities which
mark the ideal jurist, and lawyers and judges alike who had come into
professional contact with him were unreserved in their estimates of his
character and ability, his integrity and loyalty and his sincerity and
genuineness in all the relations of life. He broke down physically under the
continued strain of the work of his dual position as judge of the criminal
division of the superior court and judge of the juvenile court and was a martyr
to his love for truth and justice.
Judge Hughes was born in Fayette, Howard county,
Missouri, on the 10th of June, 1860, and was a son of J. Romeo and
Priscilla (Wilcoxson) Hughes. He received his early education in the public and
high schools of his home town and completed his studies in Central College. In
1880 he came to California and, locating in Sacramento, went to work as
bookkeeper for his uncle, Jefferson Wilcoxson, a wealthy landowner.
Subsequently he took up the study of law in A.L. Hart’s office and in the
course of time was admitted to the bar of California. He at once entered upon the
practice of his profession, his office adjoining that of Charles Oatman, both
using the same reception room. Later the law firm of White, Hughes &
Seymour was organized. Mr. Hughes soon gained general recognition as a capable
and dependable attorney, persistent in safeguarding his clients’ rights and
remarkably successful in his practice.
In 1896 Joseph W. Hughes was elected to the
bench of the superior court of Sacramento county, which position he honored by
eighteen years of devoted and unremitting service. Subsequently he was also
made judge of the juvenile court, a position for which he was by nature well
fitted, for he was a man of kindly and sympathetic regard for the rights of the
wives and children who were in need of legal protection. He threw about them
the protecting arm of the law and was vigilant and unceasing in looking after
their safety and welfare. Thus he gave much of his personal attention to a
multitude of details which later were assigned to probation officers, and this
work, in addition to the arduous duties of the superior court over which he
presided, overtaxed his strength.
In the course of a review of the judicial record
of Judge Hughes, the Sacramento Bee, at the time of his death, said: “Leaders
of the bar in California who have tried their cases before him have universally
testified to his clearness of vision, his lucidity of expression, his quick and
correct comprehension of tangled legal points and the courage and
determination, without offensiveness, with which he struck right from the
shoulder in his decisions… A decision by Judge Hughes decided a question
clearly and distinctly. There was absolutely no trace of ambiguity about it,
but it struck right down to the roots of the question. There was no verdict for
one side, with an apology for the other. There were no compromises in his
decisions. They were all as clear as day, so that a child could understand
them… Even the justices of the supreme court liked to receive decisions from
‘Joe’ Hughes, even when they did not agree with him, for they knew they would
not have to spend hours in trying to find out what he was driving at.
“Judge Hughes was always prompt, courteous,
decisive, and yet kindly. He treated all attorneys gentlemanly, but would stand
no nonsense, no procrastination and no quibbling from any of them. He wasted no
time and allowed them to waste none. If a question were to be decided, he did
not hem and haw and compromise, fearing to hurt someone’s feelings, but decided
promptly and definitely and ordered the case to go on…
“Judge Joseph W. Hughes will be best remembered
and best be honored by the work he did as judge of the juvenile court. There is
absolutely no question but that work killed him. He toiled at it day and night
for years. He stuck to it with a patience and devotion to duty, an affection
and a careful guardianship over the children that was remarkable. In his last
three or four years upon the bench he easily did the work of three men, but he
never complained. At one time he must have had over four hundred families in
this community under his protecting care, to see that the women and children
were provided for and that the earnings of the husband or other male member of
the family went to such family. It was a great and noble work, nobly performed,
and yet few people in this city or county knew what Judge Hughes was doing…
Still there were not a few, especially those connected with the juvenile court,
and those whom newspaper or other business brought into constant contact with
the proceedings of that court, who recognized Judge Hughes at his true value,
and who knew the patient, untiring, devoted and ceaseless care he bestowed upon
his duties in connection with the protection of neglected wives or helpless
children. They knew he was not satisfied with doing just his duty in these
matters, but that he went even further and did more than his duty as a man.
They knew that frequently he went down into his own pockets to relieve the want
and suffering of those whom the tragedies of life had brought before him.”
Editorially, the Bee said, “In the juvenile
court, as the practical guardian and protector of some four hundred families,
Judge Hughes made a name for himself that will grow all the brighter as the
years go by. It is no exaggeration, but the plain, unvarnished truth, to say
that he killed himself at a task begun as a duty and continued as a labor of
love…”
Judge Hart, of the appellate court, paid the
following tribute to Judge Hughes: “Judge Hughes’ death is a distinct loss to
this community. I have known him well since he first came to Sacramento. In
1896 he was elected superior judge of Sacramento county along with the late
Judge Matthew Johnson and myself. Judge Hughes had a remarkable legal mind and
a very ready grasp of legal propositions. His decisions were noted for their
clearness of expression and their clarity of thought. He was a man of strong
character, ever ready and honest in all of his opinions on all subjects, and
courageous in their expression. He had great physical courage and was one of
the finest trial judges in California. As juvenile court judge he was a potent
factor in the reformation of young people and a good father to those who had
gone wrong…”
Judge W.A. Anderson said, “Judge Hughes was in
many respects a remarkable man. Coupled with his brains was the broad common
sense consideration of all questions which should characterize a judicial mind…
While at all times a close reasoner, he was so averse to drawing to nice
distinctions of points of law, but adhered to the broad questions of justice
between man and man.”
On April 18, 1893, in Sacramento, Judge Hughes
was united in marriage to Miss Nellie Stanley, and they became the parents of a
son, Gordon S. Hughes, who is engaged in the practice of law in Sacramento,
being a graduate of the law school of the University of California at Berkeley.
He married Miss Ruth Bryte.
Politically Judge Hughes was a democrat and at
all times maintained a deep interest in public affairs. He was a member of the
Free and Accepted Masons, in which he had passed through the chairs of all of
the York Rite bodies, and was a Noble of the Mystic Shrine. He also had
membership in the Benevolent Protective Order of Elks, and the Foresters of
America, in which he served as grand chief ranger of California. He belonged to
the Sutter Club, the Del Paso Duck Club and the Canvasback Club. He was a lover
of outdoor life, hunting being his chief recreation, and nothing gave him
greater pleasure than to lay aside his arduous court duties over the week end
and hunt ducks. In this sport he was enthusiastic and it was his boast that he
could outtramp on the hunt almost any other hunter in California. Personally,
he was cordial and friendly in his social relations, and his steadfastness and
loyalty as a friend gained for him the sincere esteem of all who enjoyed the
privilege of association with him. He advocated and supported movements and
measures for the civic and moral betterment of his community and during all the
years of his residence here was recognized as one of Sacramento’s best
citizens, in the finest sense of the term.
Transcribed by Debbie Walke Gramlick.
Source: Wooldridge, J.W. Major History of the Sacramento Valley California, Vol. 2 pgs. 18-23. The Pioneer Historical Publishing Co. Chicago 1931.
© 2005 Debbie Walke Gramlick.