Biographical Sketches

JUDGE S. P. TWISS

The book of life which registers every occurrence in the career of Judge Stephen Prince Twiss, is replete with the history of nearly 70 years of honorable usefulness. The opening pages state that he was born in Charlton, Massachusetts, May 2, 1827, his parents being James J. and Elsie (Prince) Twiss, of Worcester county, Massachusetts. One brother, Amos Freeman, died December 25, 1895, at Worcester, Massachsetts; and 1 sister, Abbie Davis, now Mrs. George H. Brewer, of Ashton, Illinois, completed, with himself, the family circle.

James Twiss, the paternal grandfather of our subject, was of English parentage, but was born in the Bay state. He followed agricultural pursuits throughout his life and died at his old home, at the advanced age of 80 years. He had 5 children, one of whom was our subject's father. On the maternal side of the house the grandfather was Stephen Prince, and active, energetic farmer and a great student of the Bible. He took much much interest in the public affairs of the town of Oxford, Worcester county, where he lived over half a century. He too was almost 80 years of age at the time of his demise.

Reared on a farm and surrounded by deeply religious influences the Judge passed his childhood. At 15 years of age he began to work for neighboring farmers in the summer and attended school in the winter. At 18 years of age he learned the carpenter's trade, and by following this occupation through the summer he was enabled to spend 5 terms in study at the Leicester Academy. At 21 years of age he secured a position in a produce commission store in Boston, which belonged to his uncle, Stephen Prince, and during the winters of 1848, 1849 and 1850 he taught in a country school. While still a lad a prophetic shadow of his future greatness cast itself before his friends' visions and awakened to activity a longing to reach out and grasp the honors which he felt someday would be granted him. The law seemed a great attraction to him, as he grew older he became convinced that in that direction lay his best chances for working out his career. From the time that this decision was made he lost no opportunity to read of legal matters and kept his eyes open for any information which might be dropped in his presence. In May, 1850, he entered the Dane Law school, of Harvard University, and in March 1853, was duly admitted to practice. In Worcester he began the practice of his chosen profession, remaining there until November, 1865. His ability was recognized at once, and in December, 1862, he was elected to the city council. This position he resigned in January, on being elected city solicitor, the law being such that he could not hold both offices at once. Fortune favored him, and a number of most important cases for the city were disposed of, to the people's entire satisfaction. He was re-elected to this office, and, it is needless to say, discharged his duties with markedfidelity. In November, 1856, Mr. Twiss had been elected to the legislature of Massachusetts, serving in the session of 1857, when he embraced the opportunity to vote for Charles Sumner, who was at that time re-elected to the United States senate. 

In the Fall of 1861, John A. Andrew, governor of Massachusetts, offered Mr. Twiss the command of a company to go to the war, which offer he accepted; but before arrangements were completed for raising the regiment the order was changed, as no more soldiers were then needed. He subsequently accepted a similar offer from the city government and was proceeding to raise his company when the adjutant general of the state informed the mayor of Worcester that there had been some mistake as to the number of men already raised by the city, and that it had already furnished 8 more men than its allotted portion; and upon the receipt of this information to further efforts were made. Later on, when Jackson's threatened invasion of Washington was causing considerable fear in the north, Judge Twiss was one of the 300 men raised in 2 days in Worcester, Massachusetts. They started to Washington and had proceeded as far as Boston when the news reached them that their services were not necessary, for the alarm of the threatened invasion was passed and the men were sent home. Although never going to the front, our subject had fully demonstrated his loyalty to the government and his willingness to serve his country.

Believing the west would be the most favorable quarter for rapid advancement in his profession, Mr. Twiss removed to Kansas City in November, 1865, and has since been identified with its interests. Young men with more than ordinary cleverness and efficiency were held at a premium, and Mr. Twiss was not long in proving his ability. In November, 1872, he was elected to the lower house of the state legislature of Missouri, and so creditably did he perform his duties that he was twice re-elected, serving six years in all. In the spring of 1878, George M. Shelly was elected mayor of Kansas City, with a democratic council, Mr. Shelly being a democrat. Nevertheless, although Mr. Twiss is a republican, he was appointed by the mayor as city counselor and the appointment was confirmed by the council. During the time he held that office a large number of damage cases against the city were tried and only two verdicts were rendered against him. Some of these cases involved many thousands of dollars, and those he lost altogether cost the city only about $900.00

During the presidential campaign of 1880, Mr. Twiss was appointed associate justice of the supreme court of the territory of Utah, his term beginning January 1, 1881. He held the office for a little more than 4 years. After President Cleveland was elected, in 1884, and before he took office, the democratic territorial committee of Utah told our subject that if he would accept the re-appointment to the same office he was holding they would use their influence to see that he was not removed under a democratic administration. Soon after the expiration of his term he returned to Kansas City and resumed general law practice. To give an idea of his standing in the profession, his ability and the favorable judgment passed upon it, we copy from the Salt Lake Tribune a part of the report of the court proceedings of 1882:

�His honor then delivered his charge to the grand jury, the general instructions being very explicit as to the specific duties and obligations imposed by law upon a jury of that class, defining every point in a very lucid manner. One of the points emphasized was their duty to inquire into willfully corrupt misconduct in office of the public officers of every description. He then adverted to the Edmunds bill, making use of the following language:

� 'Within the last year congress has legislated with special reference to this territory. It is my duty to call your attention to some of this legislation. The first section of the act of congress, approved March 22, 1882, known a the Edmunds bill, defines who is guilty of polygamy as follows: 'Every person who has a husband or wife living, who hereafter marries another, whether married or single, and any man who hereafter simultaneously or on the same day marries more than one woman, is guilty of polygamy, and prescribes the punishment for this odious crime. The third section provides that if any male person hereafter cohabits with more than one woman he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and prescribes punishment for this office.'

� 'It is as much your duty to investigate violations of these provisions of law as any other. Your belief as to the injustice or justice of this law has nothing to do with your duties as grand jurors. You cannot violate the oaths you have taken simply because you may not believe the law is just or proper. The congress of the United States is a law-making power which you and I, court and jury alike, are bound under the sacred obligations of our official oaths to respect. The constitution of the United States and the acts of congress duly passed in pursuance thereof are the paramount laws of the land, and when we are required in pursuance of official duties, in due form of law imposed upon us, under the obligations of the oaths we have taken, to execute them, we cannot, as good citizens, true to our country, 'attached to the principles of the constitution of the United States and well disposed to the peace and good order of the same,' refuse to perform plain and well defined duties simply because we may not approve or are opposed to such laws. Your duties are of the utmost importance, and at times you may find them difficult. You stand between the people, the government on one side and the accused on the other, and you are required to act with fairness to all; you have not only a power, but a trust is given you which you cannot afford to abuse. It may be your duty to refuse to fnd an indictment against an enemy; it may be your duty to indict a friend; but be it friend or foe whose case you are investigating, you will not, I trust, be governed by personal feeling or inclinations of any kind whatever, either for or against any person. That you will enter upon and perform the duties before you guided by an intelligent conscience in the performance of all that the law and your oaths require of you, is my desire and expectation.' �

As there were some men on the jury who were naturalized citizens the reference to attachment to the principles of the constitution of the United States, etc., was apt and timely, as it was a part of the oath which such person took at the time they became citizens, and it undoubtedly had some effect with some of the jurors.

The case of Cannon vs. Thomas was one of great interest to the people of the territory and especially to the people of Salt Lake City. It was a mandamus in which Cannon, the relator, claimed that he had been elected delegate to congress by a large majority and that the governor had refused to give him a certificate of election, praying for a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the governor to give the certificate of election to Cannon. It was thoroughly argued and the excitement of the people of Salt Lake City was at fever heat. The court denied the writ, and in the somewhat lengthy opinion he used the following language: �If the duty of the governor in determining who has the greatest number of votes thrown by the qualified voters of the territory is not a judicial act, it is far from being ministerial; it is at least an executive duty of a political character which may at times require the best and soundest discretion.�

This opinion was, of couse, fiercely attacked by the Mormon press and many of the people of that faith. On the other side it was faithfully defended by the Gentile press, and the Salt Lake Tribune said: �Of the decision itself too much praise cannot be given. It shows with what a conscientious desire to do exact justice Judge Twiss undertook to perform his duty and with what masterful ability he reached his conclusions. While the friends of Mr. Cannon are disappointed at the result we do not see how any one who will read the conclusions of his Honor can fail to realize their absolute correctness. It takes a higher plane than ordinary decisions. It gives to even the ordinary reader an idea that the law is an exact science and furnishes an example of a problem that could have but one solution.�

Judge Twiss' bearing while on the bench was always dignified and pleasing to the bar and all parties in court. He was always patient with others and painstaking and explicit in the routine duties of this position, and in the investigation of the facts sometimes almost inextricably involved with error.

Judge Twiss was married February 16, 1870, at Somerset, Massachusetts, to Miss Louisa Woodbury Clark, daughter of Rev. Nelson and Elizabeth (Gillman) Clark. Her father was then pastor of the Congregational church at Somerset, Massachusetts. Mrs. Twiss died at Kansas City about five months after her marriage. The Judge was again married August 5, 1873, his second union being with Mrs. Emeline Bidwell, widow of Alonzo F. Bidwell and a daughter of Samuel Conklin, of Tecumseh, Michigan. One child was born to the Judge by his second wife, but died in infancy.

In social circles and as a promoter of education, Judge Twiss has ever held a prominent place. He is a member of Kansas City commandery, No. 10, K. T., and with his estimable wife belongs to the Congregational church. He is president of the board of trustees of Kidder Academy, of Caldwell county, and also a trustee of Drury College. Whatever he has conscientiously attempted Judge Twiss has not failed to accomplish. His tenacity of purpose, strict integrity and varied capabilities command the admiration and respect of all who known him. His office is in the Rialto Building, where he is always found ready to give his professional services to his old friends, although he has no sign out as a lawyer. At 425 Gladstone avenue is a spacious mansion to which the Judge retires after the day's work is done. There Mrs. Twiss resides and together they entertain their friends or enjoy the quiet of each other's society.

Back

This page was last updated August 2, 2006.