Jim Hugessen died on April 21st, 2024. He was 90 years old. Aside from having had a distinguished career as a Federal Court Judge he was a great guy. Neither my partner nor I can precisely recall when we first met Jim. At the time he was living in the grand stone home along the Mississippi River adjacent the Maclan Bridge that goes through the middle of town. The home (purchased by Rob Prior and refashioned as the “Almonte RIverside Inn”) is immediately adjacent St. Paul’s Anglican Church whence derives considerable history bearing upon Jim’s erstwhile spousal connection to the Rosamonds, the wool gatherers of eminent distinction in town.
Though we dined together on occasions in a civilized manner in his big house on Queen Street and subsequent smaller house on Carleton Street along the Esplanade on Coleman’s Island, the banquet I recall in particular was one in a local restaurant with a young blind lawyer from western Canada. Jim was legally blind. Having the two of them at table was a singular affair. Neither of them made any apology or excuse for their restriction (nor of course should they have done so); indeed they so successfully surmounted the impediment that it was rather discomposing for those of us who were fully enabled. The methods by which blind people overcome putative roadblocks without transparent accommodation is utterly enlightening. Reportedly for example Jim downhill-skied at Mont Tremblant.
When I visited Jim at his place on Lac Tremblant we dignified the moment by staying up late and gossiping over repeated pours of whiskey while everyone else in the household retired for the night. He could hold his own under any circumstance. Though he bluntly remarked the next morning while preparing coffee in the kitchen that we had surpassed necessity.
There were other more esoteric matters about which Jim illustrated his staunchness. Strangely enough he and I devoted considerable attention to the development of a template for an Inter Vivos trust agreement. The percolating debate surrounded topical matters relating to estate administration, particularly the transmission of wealth from one generation to another with the least impact of lawyers, estate administration costs and provincial probate fees. As you might imagine, the subject was of acute interest to those who control the provincial coffers. And current jurisprudence was not without its political bias. Probate fees are a common, transparent, generous provincial tax grab. Years earlier I had acted for two children of two elderly parents. The children hired me to figure a way to avoid successive probate fees upon the death of their parents. As the children had predicted, the father and mother died within a short period of one another. Without becoming a complete bore, I can report that the trust agreement I developed (significantly – though casually only – with the oversight and encouragement of Jim) saved the day. Because the agreement was not off-the-shelf, it meant so much to the process of composition to have a superior court judge digesting the theoretical idea for possible error or dispute. As it turned out Jim’s employment of the identical trust agreement caused a rift between him and a financial advisor who refused (as is often the wont of banks to do) to acknowledge the refinement of the trust which of course entirely defeated the thrust of the document. The bank was intent only upon recognizing the beneficial interest of the settlors not the trustees (I told you this could be boring). Jim moved his account elsewhere.
Jim was an inveterate walker. And he loved his dog Rosie. Without advance notice, the two of them would often pop into my office for an afternoon chat. Jim was discriminate about these visits which were frequently paralleled by rain or snow. And perhaps even a visit to Baker Bob next door. But quite apart from the temptation to dismiss the object of society, we inevitably fell into a delightful window of conversation.
In the latter part of my career my partner and I worked together in the law office. Upon retirement and closure of my office, Jim asked to employ my partner for continuing assistance because his rates were lower than my own. Naturally it proved a workable and satisfactory agreement. And I have always admired Jim for his unblemished sparsity.
Even with Jim now gone my partner and I are able to extend our relationship with Jim through our friendship with Alan Diner who was Jim’s clerk and who is now a Federal Court Judge as well. By entire serendipity I had met Alan at the beginning of his career shortly before he departed the court in Ottawa to Toronto. At the time neither of us knew the other’s connection to Almonte. Since then naturally we have connected the dots. I have no doubt as well that Jim’s memory shall continue to insinuate many aspects of life in Almonte and far beyond.