The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1872-01-04

.4.ses s14s.
has. been taken, q. the requess of said
sM0MasterS aud who sdid mot Gpnswer
whSn callsd at his trial. and3or refusing
tostate tosthe court whethet he had any
c9mn4unicAtions. with said Ayery.touoh.
Ing hte absenoes slprior to his departure.
In answer 10 the above rule, this re-.
spondent says that on the occasion re-
terred to in the above rule, according to
his best xecolieotfon, tie only question
proponnded by the court to this re-
spondene was: "Mr. MclIaster, where is
|'your ,ali4nt?r To which this respond.
AMI Replied; II hope the court viii az.
cnse ms from answering that question:"
The Question Was repeated by She court.
and received fdensicAily tho sanie-repiS.
This respondent vas NOT aware shAt he
- 4Nka1b9t TIN npuFts sesswbs bsttmA1tna
NIn NInM uni1aa on siths Aid ANeSSy,
tptagkisE. ~ abssnce. prios 60 his de,
phrt4fef lard ithefsfofe could not have
answered or have reiused to answer said
question. ~; ..;i:.''r-.'r.,%~..@--
n making the auswer ial,r, Which j, be. did
TO the court, whilst standing ct the Bar,
in discharge OF his fegitipa@ duty as an
attorney at law, this respondent says
that he disclaims and de1foy any inten.
ton Of showing any disrespect to the
court. or putting himself In contempt
thereto. or Of knowingly or wilfully il.
fringing or disobeying any rule thereof;
that in his position as an attorney, com
missioned to exercise high and sacred
duty, as an officer sworn to do his duty,
he was consoientiously seeking to dis
charge that duty; that as member of
the bar. and as an officer Of this court,
he has never forgotten the respect due
to the court: and on this occasion, as on
all others. he has tried to observe OF the
court that same respect which he has
shown to the court. But whilst remem-
beting bis relations to the bench. he
claims. also. certain rights and privi-
ieges for the bar, which are as sacred as
those OF life and liberty, and which he
felt bound to assert.
This respondent respectfully submits
that. as an attorney. in tho discharge OF
his duty, there was no requirement upon
MS part to answer the question pro-
pounded; aud that his mere refusal, in
courteous terms. to do 30, was no con.
tempt Of the court.
| r.
says TINT, if he had derived any informa.
tion Of the whereabouts OF his client.
from his client himself, it would have
been i breach OF professional confidence
on his part to Disclose snch information.
1t. on the other hand, he had obtained
suoh Information from other sources. he
submits that it was not his duty to be.
come an informant against his client.
He. therefore, respectfully submits that
bis refusal to answer the question pro-
pounded was no contempt of the court:
and that. to have answered, would have
brought upon him, and he would have
Justly merited, the contempt of every
honorable practitioner At the bar in
South Carolina.
This respondent, further answering.
says that he was in no sense, either
morally or legully, the custodian OF his
client, who was under reoognizance or
bail. The respondent, further answer.
lug, says that the defendant, Edward T.
Avery, was not admitted to bail at his
request. but only upon his application, as
an attorney OF the court: and that bail
was allowed. not as favor to this re-.
spondent, but es matter OF right to the
said defendant. and that, too, upon the
terms prescribed by the court. and after
an examination, by the court, OF the
sutiiciency OF the sursties.
F. w. MoMASTER.
r. w. McMaster. having been duly
sworn, says that the matters stated in
the foregoing return are true, to the
best of his knowledge and belief.
F. w. MoMASTER.
Sworn to before me, this I'd day O!
January, 1872.
WM. X. BACHMAN,
Notary Public.
Alter reading the answer, Mr.. Fick-
ling proceeded to argue tho points there
IN set Forth. He commenced with q
high tribute to the virtue, integrity, ho.
nor and high character of Col, McMas.
ter. as being incapable of committing
any act unbecoming gentleman or a
practitioner Of the court, and expressed
his astonishment at the cotton of that
august tribunal, threatening such a man
with the heaviest and most degrading
punishment in it's power to pronounce
punishment which. when deserved,
was coupled with lasting infamy and
shame. and which wQs never infiicted.
except upon evidence of fraud. corrup-
tion. or gross violation OF duty.
The hrst question. however, said the
speaker, which arises in this instance.
IS. Was the failure OF Col. MoAfaster to
answer tho inquiries OF the court con.
tempt? Contempt is we'll known and
recognized offence, the first element in
which is rudeness, defiance. or disre.
spect OF the court. Could the conduct
OF Colonel McMaster be so considered.
when he not even. refused to answer the
Question of the court, but had merely
requested, in q courteous manner, to be-
excused from doing so?
The speaker then went on to show
that even admitting. for the sake of .rgu.
ment. that Col. McMaster's refusal or
failure to answer the questions of the
court, might be construed into con.
tempt, the punishment inflicted oonld