Wilmington journal., 1876-07-14
1he Case of Contempt.


The case of the State VS.. James Hea-
ton was brought to a conclusion yes
terday.
The answer of the respondent to the
two rules was filed and read to the
court Yesterday morning at L o'clock.
The answer stated that the missing
hill of Indictment was III slaid, and
that its non production was not for the
purpose of concealing record OF the
court, nor in any manner to treat the
court with contempt. As to the tear
ing up of the copy OF the rule and
leaving the county, the answer dis
claimed all inteution of committing a
contempt OF court.
The counsel for the State asked
leave to introduce testimony for the
purpose of rebutting this answer,
Argument by the counsel for the
State and for the Respondent,
as to the admissibility of this
testimony. consumed the morning
session. The Court ruled that the
testimony was admissible, aud ad-
;ourned to 3 O'Clock Z. NJ. AT 4 o'clock
His Honor took his seat on the bench
and the case was resumed. MIR. Davis,
who, together with Messrs. Strange
and Russell, had on Wednesday been
requested by the Court to assist in
the prosecution, addressed the Court
at some length in explanation of the
position III the cause which he and his
associates occupied. They were not
there as officers of the law, nor as
privately employed counsel, but they
appeared in the case at the request of
His Honor as Amici CDriCs, and acting
in that capacity they felt it incumbent |
upon them to advise ahd TO do what |
they in their coDsciences Thought to be |
right and proper-nO more and no less. |
AS to the rule for contempt in the |
non-production of the bill of indict- !
ment against the Respondent for ex-
that the answer of the Respondent J
sufficiently purged h N of the con-
tempt, as the answer stood uncontra-
dic.ed.
But as to the rule for contempt in
the destruction of the original rule
and then leaving the county while un-
der process for his appearance on
Wednesday, there was some difference
Of opinion between himself and his
associates. His own opinion-has-
tily formed, and not very clear nor de-
cided-inclined him to the position
that these two acts would constitute
case of contempt which even the an
swer did not explain away. But mas
much as his opinion was not fully ma
tured he yielded it to the
decided conviction of his associates
that the answer was sufficient. They all
agreed that the State was not in pos
session of such testimony as would be
sufficient to rehnt the answer and,
therefore, agreed in advising the
court to discharge the rnle.
M. London, Esq, of counsel for
the respondent, rose and asked to re-
peat to the Court what he had already
minated in former stage of these
proceedings, that he by no means
wished to be understood as taking
the position that this proceeding had
been undertaken hastily and without
probable cause. Unexplained. the
conduct Of the Respondent had been
such as to justify its commencement,
and he thought that it would result in
good
After a few remarks of caution to
the respondent. he was discharged
on the payment of costs.
REMARKS
It will be seen from the above, in {
splte OF the ugly coloring given to mis-
conduct by the affidavits of She ..iff
aanning and Messrs. Gerken and
bishop, that Mr.. Heaton has been able
10 purge himself of the contempts
charged against him. Mr.. Heaton
solemnly swears in substance that
neither in word, deed or intent had he
consciously committed any con-
Tempt Of Court. Nothing but the
omprehensiveness of Mr.. Heaton's
oath of purgation saved him from
severe punishment, and he may well
congratulate himself that he was able
oplsce his hand upon the Holy Evan
gellst of Almighty God and swear that
De was guiltless of criminal intent in
sae matters charged against him. And
We doubt not that the proceedings of
he day will be solemn and sufficient
'srning to him and to others that the
COURTS have rights that all men are
bound to respect.
In this connection it occurs to us
10 say that his His Honor Judge Nc.
Aoy requests us to state that if he
Used the word indictment" as is re-
ported in the JOURNAL of Thursday in
connection with Mr.. j. J. Cassidey's
name. it was an error on his part, as
@s alleged missing paper was "pre-
ssptment" only.
tLiPPINGS FROM LAST NIGHTS
NAIL.