The Nevada journal., 1853-05-13

but what is contempt OF c0urtt Dy re-
ference to the Statutes of California the an.
swer is easily found. There are several ca
ses Of contempt instanced, but not one Of
them refers even remotely to newspaper pub-
lications. To constitute contempt there
must be disturbance in the presence Of the
court or disobcdience ofits legal mandate.
Neither Of these can apply to a publication
in newspaper, unless it stirred up riot and
disturbance in the presence of the court. II
the court issued an injunction to restrain
publication in any instance, which, for the
purpose Of argument VIC admit its power 10
do and the injunction is disregardcd, ii would
be able to punish for contempt. But no such
mandate penetrated onr sanctum-we viola.
ted no injunction-we set no precedent-we
committed no contempt
1t might be uscful inquiry how far con-
tempt could be committed toward court IN
case not yet upon its docket, said coart also
not in session; bat We waive thst
There Is a.proper limit to Judicial author
ity it never sheuld contemplate that abcy.
ance on the part Of the pablo and the press
to give it rule arbitrary in all matters, to in
fiict vengeance at will. No Judge should
think 10
Like Cato give his little Senate laws,
And sit attentive TO his own applause"
We might also remark, il it were worth
the space, that in the late election, vheE sto.
rics were industriously circulated against
Hon. w. II. Barbour, so annoying to him
that he, as he said, departed from his sense
Of propriety in that being judge he ad-
dressed public meetings throughout the dis
trict to answer such reports, our paper,
though opposed to him ia politics, published
not line Of these accusations. There are
moments in mans life when it is vital to
him to have fair opponents. Such Judge
Barbour found rs. We, however, will not
take the trouble 10 remark that It may some
times be in as good taste to restrain judicial
animadversions as editorial comments.
We know too we'll the duties Of a lawyer to
to object to the course Mr.. Chufchmon saw
fit to pursue to serve the interests of his client
whose life in a great measure was In his
hands. 1t was his duty to turn the most triv.
al incident to his advantage; we honor his
zeal more than we object to his inconsisten
cy. We do not see the same excuse for the
invectives of the bench, or such palliation for
its crusade against the press.
In the matter Of such publications we will
conccde far more to courtesy and the public
interests, than we will to compulsion. If the
bar and bench believe the public interests
will be best subserved by repressing evidence
on examinations, We will cheerfully comply.
But that heretofore such has been indicated,
VIC emphatically deny.
1t is little too late to enforce in Calilor-
MIA toward the press the favorite policy of
Louis Napoleon. If an English reference is
better liked, we do not believe the District
Court of the 10th Judicial District possesses
tho attributes of the Star Chamber, to fine
and imprison for any act it may deem a con-
tempt. We will guard to the last degree Of
teRacity our rights as members of the press,
while we will yield due respect to the officials
of the law, while they keep in the line Of
their duty towards us.