The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1875-06-10
TELEGRAPHIC
MIDNIGHT DISPATCHE
CIVIL RIGHTS.
Judge morrill, yacates Tie Rnic
Against the PrOprictOrs Of
the Galveston News.
Remarks Of Judge ItalIinger
Oh the Law Of COntempts.

GALVESTON, June 9.-The following
il the conclusion of Judge MorrilPs
opinion In the contempt case to-day
AS no act is criminal whose intent is
not such, therefore, unless the intent
IN this case--the obstruction OF justice
ON the part of the publishers, the
laws of the United States were not
thereby violated. The publishers have
unrestricted liberty to apply any cpl
thets to the Judge Of the court without
being in contempt tor so doing, and no
further or other proceedings connect
ed herewith will he had In this court.
ISigpedJ AMOS MORRILL,,
District Judge
On the conclusion of the reading of
the foregoing document, Judge Ballin-
ger, counsel for the Galveston News,
said;
conceive 1t my duty, rs counsel In
in an important matter, involving the
rights of the citizen and the liberty OF
the press, to say that it was my I'M
derstanding, Oh yesterday, that your
honor would, MT determine whether
the editorial article in the Galveston
News came within the jurisdiction OF
your honor for an inquiry as to its
being an Ottense under the laws OF the
United States, Or contempt or your
court, without first hearing me upon
the legal questions involved. Your
opinion Just now seems to assume tnat
the editorial article was an obstruction
of Justice within the meaning OF the
statute of the United States, defining
contempts of its courts. ] must regret
that this should he assumed in case
which am counsel, without hearing
me. ! think it my duty to state that my
convictions are the clearest and strong-
est that IL IL M act over which you
have no Jurisdiction. n Articles OF I'M
parchment were prepared against
Judge Peck, the United States district
Judge of Missouri, for Furnishing a
newspaper article as contempt. me
statute of 1889, under which he acted
was general, authorizing the punish.
ment of contempt of the authority OF
the courts. Judge Peck failed OF con-
yiction by one vote on the 3lst OF jan
uary. 1881. On the second of March,
1881, the present statute of contempt.s
was passed, and as to others than OIL
GERS of the court applies only to mis-
behavior in presence of the court or SO
near thereto as to abstruct the admin
istration of Justice" The same statute
inflicted the punishment by indict-
ment, which was deemed proper
to wrongful efforts to lulluence
juries. The field of constructive
cOntsmpts involved IN the newspaper
article is not within the jurisdiction
ofthis court. NOOne IL more sincerely
DESTROYS than myself of upholding
the lawful authority of this court ana
that its rights end dignity should be
preserved, but this should be done only
In accordance with law, and l make
my respectful protest that the graVest
error will be committed IL the court
assumes the power to hold, as for con-
tempt, publishers, editors or proprie-
tors to answer for newspaper articles.
/ have only said what deem to be my
duty under the circumstances OF the
case
Judge Morrill, said that he did not
consider anything before him proper
for further discussion or agitation OF
the public mind. He had merely sent
polite note and courteous request 10
the publishers of the News to know
whether they intended to interfere
with Justice. When an attachment
would issue, or the rights or liberty OF
any one was' interfered with, IL wouiu
be time enough to discuss the effect OF
the laws OF congress on the subject