Case ID: mart-os_1/html/0101-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      By the Court.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE TERRITORY vs. THIERRY.
    
    Spring, 1810.
    First District.
    Written interogatories not necessary in all cases of contempt.
    This was an attachment for a contempt of this Court, by a libellous publication subscribed with the defendant’s name, and printed in the Courrier de la Louisiane, of which he was one of the editors. It was grossly and indecently abusive, and appeared to have been written for the purpose of making an improper impression on the public mind, in favor of a person against whom the Grand Jury had just found an indictment for a libel.
    The paper being produced in Court, and proof made that the defendant was editor and printer of it, the Court, Martin, J. alone, directed the attachment to issue in the first instance.
    On the defendant being brought in, the paper was shewn to him, and he acknowledged he was the editor of it and the writer of the piece: whereupon the Court informed him no advantage would be taken of his admission, but he must give bail for his appearance on a future day, to answer interrogatories. -
    He replied he needed no time.
    The Court then advised him to speak to an attorney.'
    He answered he had no occasion for counsel, and on his repeating he wanted no delay :
    He was sworn, and the paper being again shewn him, he repeated his former acknowledgment.
    The Court directed it be recorded, and having heard him in his defence, gave judgment that he pay a fine of fifty dollars, and be imprisoned during ten days.
    On the next day, Duncan for the defendant, moved that the proceedings against him from the time of his appearance in Court, be set aside, and that he might be admitted to give bail to answer interrogatories. He said that no judgment could be given, nor could any defendant be compelled to answer in any case, except that of a contempt committed in the face of the Court, until a written charge or accusation was filed against him.
    
      
       Lewis, J. being personally alluded to in the piece, refused to take any part in this case.
    
   By the Court.

When the contempt is of such a nature, that when the fact is once acknowledged, the Court cannot receive any further information by interrogatories than it is already possessed of, the defendant may be admitted to make such simple acknowledgment, without answering interrogatories. 4 Black. 287.

On the tenth day the Court directed the sheriff to discharge him, reckoning the fraction of the day of commitment as a whole day.