The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1875-05-29

ton and criticism. Precedent and usage
have little weight or authority if they VIII
not bear the tombstone Of reason. Hoar
practices, and systems, aud ideas, are
overturned with ruthless hand if they do
not agree with the spirit Of the aye. The
ancient prestige, powers and privileges, 50
long anquestioned aud conceded 10 tho
Judiciary, no longer form any exception.
They are the theme of an able article in
the Port Tobacco Times which We trans
fer 10 our own columns, promising that il
must have emanaied from legal mind,
and that il win be read with much INFER
est
A RKlIc OF DRsPorisM. recent i'm
prisonment OF one Of The editors Of the
Chicago Times by Judge Williams Of that
place for contempt OF court serves the
occasion TO call attention to the despotie
powers which are vested in, or assumed
BY courts and Legislative assemblies, in pun
ishing so-called eontempts. In this par
ticulaE case the editor had thought proper 10
publish in his paper certain comments IN re-
laiion to Judge Williams and the court over
which he presided. That these remarks were
1nduly harsh and improper we concede, but
that only makes il the more clear, that the
editor who thus transcribed the bounds Of
decent criticism and true journalism ought to
have been liable TO punishment. Il Is not
that he was unjustly punished, but il is as to
the process by which be was punished that NE
find fault. He was brought before the Judge
and committed to jail for ten days for con
tempt Of court. Doubtless this editor deserv.
ed the punishment he received IL is the
boast Of the common Law which we derive
from our English ancestors, that no man shall
be deprived OF his life or liberty save by the
law oftke land and the judgment Of his peers.
But under this power OF summary Punishment
for contempt OF court is cloaked desposism
as great as any that ever was exercised before
the days when the freedom loving barons
wrung the charter Of Runnymedc from the
weak and cowardiy hands Of John. II has
always been claimed that any one, however
humble, was entitled, By virtue OF the sacred
wirs Of Adbeas corpus, to have his prison doors
thrown open and the cause Of his incarcera-
ton inquired into BY some other authority
than that which committed him to confine-
ment. But all these proud boasts and guaran-
tees Of ireemen are NOT Of the slightest avail
in q case Of contempt. There the trial by
jury IS unknown and the law Of the land is the
vhim and capriee-or, as it is more mildly
pct, the discretion Of the Judge, and the wit
Of kabeas corpaks Is as helpless as il would be
against the skase Of the Emperor Of All the
Rassias. What farce il is TO boast Of our
liberties and freedom when the very mum.
nienis OF our protection may be stricken 4 wn
and destroyed BY any judicial Dogberry who
may choose TO write himself down Fan ass.
Il IS most singular anomaly that such a
rcwer, so eminenily hostile to al our notions
OF right and freedom, should have been per.
United to exist almost unqaestioned down TO
the present time Perhaps il Is the highest
compliment which could BE paid TO the long
hne Of Judges who hzve occupied the bench,
both in England and this country, TO state
this fact, but Il Is not credisAble to oar sheory
Of government that is citiEens mar Be i'm
prisoned witkozx trial By jury for an indefinite
period BY ary jadge who mar Choose to exer-
cise his discreriOn--skAt lsW Of tyrArts. Of
coarse the bench Is Jealous Of this power and
IN neAriy every Instance wherein any question
a1ecEing Il has been raised the courts have
goas great Sengsks IN sustaining is iilinitahle
exerrsse. We ny i down wlehoni fear OF
continuation tn, Tie jadge s the sole po~er
10 dezzzEaiae UAzz : = eoafeups, that Il has
heea ea1zsEfed, and VIA; shali Be the pun
ishmeaE for The sAze In short, in this mat.
Ter ever lnu3lssAz@l jsdge Is = --lAw unto him
sell Ne hare = RStable INSTANCE Of tbs in
NeS fork- In . e2se receafiy before judge
S1isk q Rochester, Mr.. Van VOOrhis. a
p-ozise1s msnber o. the bar, with the best
Of aaosises, addressed 10 the ludge before
opening Of c0ur1 \ PFinate letter suggesting
reasons Why be shoald not sii in the trial az
that particular case. Judge Smith thought il
. contemp, for Mr.. Van Voorhis to approach |
judge privately or out Of court touching !
case pending before him and took him 10 |
task, saying that the paper oaght to have been
presented publicly in court Here is the view
Of that judge. Now let US look at the view
ofanother. When Boss Tweed was about to |
be tried in New York city his lawyers, some |
OF the most eminent at that bar, acting doubt |
less on the opinion Of Judge Smith at Roehes-
ter, prepared ard presented TO Judge Noah I
Davis, pabisSsy aid In open court, a paper |
suggesting reasons why they thought he ought |
not to sit in the trial Of the case. Now marx |
the result Judge Davis declared Tweed
lawyers to have been guilty by their action Of 1
"a contempt of eourth and fined each one Of |
them there were four) $3.50, and as great
favor let them OF from imprisonment. In |
passing sentence on them be said :--s'If the |
original paper had been handed to me pirate
", or out Of court, so that | could regard il |
only as a judge or private citizen, should
have taken no Judicial action upon il, but, he /
continues, that inasmuch as il was deliberately |
prepared and presented in open court, it was
treating the judge on the bench with disre- |
speet and he mast declare il q contempt. /
Nov this fully illustrates the hardships Of !
lodging such power in the discretion Of any
man. What one would consider respect I
another eonstrnes into contempt, and thus a
man can never know whether he has violated |
the law or not, for the simple reason that
there is no law on the subject except what is |
locked in the bosom Of the Judge and which |
is never proclaimed by him until after the /
ohense has been committed. Thus Is a Judge |
clothed with the Authority to create crime, |
10 convict for it and to punish for tall in |
his own discretion, and ali this he Is TO do er |
post facto
Nor is this the worst of this arbitrary pow
es. There IS no process by which party
may be relieved from the sentence thus passed !
on him, whether il be for day or practically
for life, just OF unjust. No othertribanal has
a right 10 review the action Of any Judge in
matter Of contempt, either as 10 the oifense
Ot - 70 tue puhisnment- Inc present Ghlef
Justice Bartol, lin Ex,parts ka,lls5y, Istk
Nj in speaking Of the power Of the circuit
courts in this respect, says that they have ssthe
power Of deciding whatconsiituted contempt
at common law and its judgment is final and
cannot be set aside or impeached' under a
writ OF habeas corpus.
We can see no necessity for the leaving Of
such absolute power in the hands Of the Jn-
dietary. There is no reason why contempt Of
court should no. be defined and punighed as
other offenses by statute. Make the penalty
as severe as yon please, but define the oifense
and aiix some limit 70 the punishment Surely
this Is subject worthy Of legislative consid.
Grafton. Port Tobacco Times.
Moag FRAUDS Certain Adminis,ra-
ton organs claim great credit for the Grant
regime ia ferreting out the whisky frauds.
Would IL not be more in consonaDee with
propriety If they were to hang their heads
in confusion and shame that such frauds
can Be practieed under the Grant Admin
istration BY the party Of .tgrcat moral