The Nevada journal., 1853-07-01
The Contempt Case.

inS' Inc Dlstrict httorney appeared
for the prosecution. Determined a mat
ter of such Importance, both with regard
to the principle involved and to the re,
suits likely to flow from it, should not
be family pursued by the defense for
lack of talent in its conduct, we had en-
pioyed the services of ]. r. Mcconnell,
one Of the ables. advocates in the State.
Upon the opening of the case, Mr..
Mcconnell moved for discharge of the
rule, stating that he could see no
motive or necessity for further proceed
ings, and he thought he could show a
sufficient cause, from authorities, for the
discharge. The facts were, he remark
ed, that it was charged that Mr.. Sar-
gent had committed contempt in pub
fishing the evidence in the case of one
Henry Jansen, in his examination be-
fore the Justice, also in making some
comments upon the same, which how
ever amounted to the same thing. There
were no facts before the court, and no
evidence had been Produced But ad-
mitting this to be the case, the case of
Jansen was not at the time before this
court, and had yet to go through the
Court of Sessions before this court could
be reached 1t was therefore fully eyi-
dent that no contempt was committed.
He designed fully to show, first, that no
contempt was committed, and secondly,
ifone was committed, it was not con-
tempt of this court.
He took occasion to remark, that he
congratulated himself and his client
that none of those personal feelings COM
mon m such cases could here obtain.
The publications objected to did not
convey reflection On this court or on
any other. No personal animosity could
exist in the mind of the judge, and what
eyer the law was it would be enforced.
He then proceeded to quote from au-
thorities the following definitions Of con-
tempt
"A contemptis wilful disregard or
disobedience of public authority"
Courts Of Justice have power to pun
ish all persons for contempt of their
PAOSSccI dAo OlSluI IuOuL III lu6lE
proceedings. .n-Bacon's Alb. Cont.
Thus stands the common law of con-
tempts. Now let us see if the act with
which Mr.. Sargent is charged may be
embraced under either of these subdi-
visisns. The facts are that at the time
Mr.. Sargent made these publications
the case had not left the Justices court.
1t had several preliminary steps to take
before it could come before this court
where then was the authority which
Mr.. Sargent could have contemned.
The justice has no power to punish such
contempt, for the law especially re-
str;cts his power to cases occurring in
his pl esence.
1t was not ? contempt of the Court of
Sessions, because the case was not yet of
record in that court, and for the same
reason it was not contempt of this
court. ! take it for granted underothese
definitions that there could be no con-
tempt unless the case was matter of
record of the court. Further, where
was the rule or order of any court DISC
3beyed by MIR. Sargent. There was none.
| here make the remark that | consider
it reprehensible for an editor, ia case
of life and death, to comment upon the
case SO as to prejudice the course of
justice. Nevertheless, this is q matter
of law and principle, and cannot come
under the head of offending against any
order or rule of the court. 1t is the
practice in some courts to issue orders
prohibiting publications of evidence, and
If these are disobeyed, the disobeyer
may be held for contempt But such
is net the case here. Again, the third
definition seems to imply some distur-
bance of the proceedings of the court.
But such is not even alleged in this
case. 1t seems therefore fully evident
under these definitions that Mr.. Sar-
gent is guiltless of contempt
He spoke of contempts as constructive
crimes, which in themselves were held
infamous by English and American en-
lightsned sentiment. History gives evil
dence of the destructive tendency of
such Judicial endorsements. By them
Algernon Sydney and other illustrious
persons of the liberal party of England
had perished on the scaffold.
He then reviewed several of the prom
inent and noted cases of contempt as set
forth in history, Ieverting to the case of
the people vs. Oswald, in Pennsylvania,
Oswald was the editor of violent par
ty paper, in that most violent age, 17S8,
just succeeding the election. One of
the most yirulent partizans of the time
was Kean, opposed to Oswald, and who
also sat upon the bench. Oswald pub
lished libel upon one Brown, who kept
female seminary,said libel being ealcu-
lated to destroy the livelihood of Brown
Brown brought an action before Ksan
for libel. Oswald conceiving it to be q
design to break down his republican
paper, published an article containing
another libel against Brown, also reflect
Ing severely on Kean, and appealing to
the people to stand between him and