The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1874-02-18
The ColuHibia Contempt Case

We have received q copy of the
learned argument of General James
'Connor, counsel for Col. A. G. Has
'kell, one of tho appellants in this
case, which presents a strong array
of legal points and authorities IN sup
port of the motion now made in the
Supreme Court to reverse tho decls-
ion of Judge Carpenter ia the Court
below. The case is onewhich cxcltes
the interest Of the profession every
where, since it involves the interests
of the Bar, throughout this and other
States. and if the deci sion be sustain
cd will place them entirely at the
mercy of the presiding judge. A
number of tho most eminent gentle
men of the Columbia Bar have been
suspended from the practice of their
profession, and thus been deprived OF
their livelihood, and this without any
charges against them of "deceit, NAL
practice or misdemeanor," to which
cases the power of the Court to re-
move or suspend is expressly limited
by the Revised Statutes. These have
not and could not have been made
against them, yet these attorneys
have been punished as if convicted
of their commission. The case is
now heard by the Supreme Court
upon written argument, and a dccls-
ion is eagerly anticipated.
The argument Of General Connor
discusses first the jurisdiction of the
State Court, and second the question
or contempt. The general jurisdlc-
'tion of Judge Carpenters Court, upon
q case properly made, is conceded,
but it is conteuded that by reason Of
Irregularities, want of service, and
other defects, the Court never had
Jurisdiction. But conceding even
that the Court had jurisdiction orig
ipaily, the argument establishes be-
Syond doubt that the proceedings in
: Bankruptcy dissolved the jurisdiction
of the State Court, and gave control
of the proceedings and of the assets
to tie United States Court. The po-
sition is fortifed'by an appeal to the
decisions Of the Federal Courts,
which the State Courts are bound to
accept as authoritive in all cases in-
>Volving the construction of Acts Of
Congress. The jurisdiction Of the
United States Court being then indis-
putable and conclusive, how could the
attorneys be guilty of a contempt in
advising their clients to seek that
forum :?
The contempt charged by Judge
Carpenter consisted first in advising
the filing of q petition of Bankrupt
'oy, in: the United States District
Court, with s,view to the transfer of
funds; and second in receiving large
fees of the iunds of the Bank in vio-
1ation Of the restraining order Of the
Court. In the matter of the fees, it
is urged that they were not large
,s1,25o paid to three firms Of high
standing, by large Banking concern,
and besides these their receipt was
in violation of no order of the Court.
AS to the other matter of contempt,
the argument of the learned counsel
urges that the fling Of the petition
was the act of~the corporation, and
the removal of the cause and the
assets was the act Of the law; SO that
the sole act Of the attorneys was to
advise. And now when this advice is
in accordance with the Supreme law of
the land, can it be q contempt? Says
the learned counsel:
:" slf the theory of Judge Carpenter
should prevail, and attorneys are re-
'sponsibfe to the Courts for the advice
which they give their clients, and the
Inquiry into'that advice can be prose-
outed by proceedings, for contempt,
which are in the nature Of bill Of
discovery, answerable on oath, there
is no limit to the oppression which
the Court can exercise over the Bar.
1t clothes the Judge with the right to
institute proceedings on his own mo-
tion, to hear them at his own Cham
bers, to decide them by his own will,
and to punish Them at his own discre-
.tion, and, as if this were not sufi-
cient, the Attorney-General denies
the right of the Supreme Court to re-
view the judgment, or reverse the
sentence of the Judge. What is this
but tyranny. and what tyranny is
more hateful than that which wrongs
in the name and under the forms Of
1au