The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1875-01-19

I
/ quainlaNees as General bmgg and
Mayors Cabell and Lnagae, "AspeeiY
puhiielrinl by an Impartial juryl' u q
right guaranteed alike 70 al under nur
constitution, and the same rules NJ law
govern the proceedings la this slate, ui
lhe trial Of the rich or poor, the inliu'
enliul or obscure, and any attempt "a
create, by publication ~ plluNi-',g Any
bias, prejudice nr uudge sympathy, iuf
az against the ACCUSED pending his
trial, among those whose province Il
will he 10 adminl lcrihe law or decide
the taels, Is al obstruction NJ pub
lip Justice, il reprelensitla Ia Tie
highest degree, aud WIS iudlelale nj
common law But the Trainers Of our
penal code, perhaps believing that, la
this enlightened age aud country,
among u people jealous Of justice aud
the sacred right Of trial by jury, 40 such
attempt would he made, enacted no
law against II, bat left the then sane
tity IN this regard "a the protection of
The courts Of the country 10 be enforced
by attachments for contempt,
"Endeayorlng, by indirect means, 10
influence the judge or jury concerning
the merits Of u case on trial, or, on the
owe Of trial, IN by circulating papers
respecting In merits etc, II mentions
cd 10y MI Bishop, In hlseXcellent work
on criminal law, ~ Que Of the develop
menta 0f human wickcdneHs, aud was
lndictahle NJ common law, Any at,
tempt 10 rendera jury partial, however
Indirect or by whatever means, has nj,
ways been regardedasa high contempt
Of court, and II made m Ollenae by the
statutes ofmauy of the states, AZ one
OF the latest enunclalons OF the doe
trlne, the following may may bo men,
toned M coming from high aud learn
ed authority After the claimant In
the late Tlchb0rne Gase had taken his
nonsut In his action Of electment,
Lord Chief Justice liOyIll committed
him for perjury, The grand jury pre-
scented indictments against him for
perjury and forgery, aud pending his
trial on these charges, Ouslaw aud
Whalley, two members Of the parlla.
ment and friends Of the claimant, cNll-
cd public meetings, ostcnsihly for the
purpose Of raising funds for his dc.
Tense, and ut which they made speech.
es endeaving 10 excite public sympn'
thy IN the claimanps favor, discussing
the Pending trial aud nsSnlling the
character of toe witnesses who had lcs-
tilted against him In the former trial,
They were Nlilrhrl for cDntemptnf
court. Lord Chief Justice Cockburn,
after summing up the ollense, SAID, IN
delivering the opinion Of the court
"rhat all this should occur, not merely
IN the provinces, but IN the mclrop-
oils, almost In the precincts of the
courts, aud written In the very dis
trict from which the persons are TO
come who are to pass Judgment be-
tween the crown and the accused In
the coming trial, how can we shut our
eyes to the fact there IL hereau outrage
upon public deccncy, and great pub.
lie scandal, and that the even and or
binary course ofpublic justice has been
unwarrantably interlered with? This
court, therefore, can not, under such
circumstances, hesitate to exercise the
authority which it undoubtedly pos
sesses for the preventing Of the public
discussion of any trial pending in court.
IL has been attempted to he commended
on your behalf that the meetings in
question were convened solely for the
purpose of obtaining money, in order
to enable the accused to carry ON HE
defense, and for the additional purpose
of removing any prejudice which the
result of the former trial may have
produced against him. But that eau
be no excuse, If the language useC
amounts to unwarrantable interference
with the course of justice. And where
we find that gentleman IF your station
and position, gentlemen Of education
n hn al
descended to lend themselves to pro.
ceedings of this character, and to hold
such language rs you have used on
these occasions, we can only contem-
plate your conduct with establishment
and regret. When it is said that all
this was done without any conscious
ness that it was any ofense against
the public justice of this court, though
1t must have the effect of creating pre-
judice with reference to the coming
trial. ! can only accept the apology as
derogatory to the understanding OF
those who make it. There capnot be
the slightest doubt in the mind of any
sensible man that such course of pro-
ceeding must interfere with public
justice If it is open to those who
take the part of the accused to discuss
in public the merits of the prosecution
in his interest, then it must be equally
open to those who believe in his guilt,
to take similar course on the other
side--and then we may have, on the
occasion of political trial, or any
case exciting great public interest, an
organized system of public, meetings
throughout the country at which the
merits and dement's of the
accused may be discussed and
canvassed on the one side
and the other, aud thus 10y appeals,