The daily gazette., 1877-05-23
QFRSyTI.1 EDITION. A
A Warning to the Press.
HOW FAR CORRESPONDENTS MAY oo I'M
oRiTicIsING THE BENCH AND BAR


Remarks Of the Court in the Matter Of tho
criticisms made by the Eeery Eyeaino
correspondent Touching the Conduct of
Counsel IN the Case of State Us. Frant
Lubv. ,
1ne foiiowing are the remarks Chief
Justce Comegys, at Court YESTERDAY. in
rsiation to the complaint of Henfy q
turner, ESD, about the criticisms made
against the defense in the Luby trial nv
tne correspondent of Euery Evening:
Chief Justice Comegys said:-"In re-
lation to the matter brought to onr At
tention yesterday as contai ned in last
Fridays number of Every Erenipg news.
paper, we have to make few remarks.
AS we understand the counsel who
brought the subject to our notice. the
article TO which our attention has been
uraWn Is not the first which has been
puohshed by that paper rejecting upon
tne prosecution and defense in the trial
of Ethe prisoner Luby. That article ia
conceived by the counsel to be iniuTions
to the Attorney General and the attor-
neys Tor the defense in their professi opal
rank and standing, in that it is likely to
produce an unfavorable impression of
their htness, on the one part to prose-
cute and on the other to defend criminal
proceedings, and especially to ininre
them in public estimation by reason of
their conduct in the prosecution and de-
fensc of this particular case. and it is
thought also by the counsel to be disre-
spectful to the court, We are asked by
the counsel in justice to them, to express
our opinion with respect to their per-
formance respectively of their several
duties growing out Of their respective re-
lations to the case. l lr
While We have no disposition at any
time to shrink from any duty that de ,
wolves upon us, Or to comply with. ar,y
fair request made by any of the members
OF the bar, We yetdO not feel that this oc-
casion is one which calls for any very ex-
tended expression on our part; as we
must think, that, whoever read the arti-
Gle In question, at once ascribed it to
mere Ignorance on the part of the writer
or. to spirit of malevolence which dee
prived 1t of its point, if it really had any
that could infiict pain. AS the result Of
our observation In this case, being pub
hcly called upon for that purpose, we as
publicly say, that in our opinion the case
was conducted with integrity and ability
on both sides: the Attorney General
certainly did all that any one could do,
and 1.-The prisoners counsel displayed a
degree of zeal and professional capacity
on their part which excited las it did in
his case) our admiration, and placed
them--if one of them had not been there
already-in the very front rank of GRIM
inal advocates. But for the sensitive
ness exhibited by the counsel with re-
spect to this article, we should not have
supposed that such an effusion could
make the slightest impression upon their
minds; calm as they ought to be, having
done the utmost on each side that their
duty called for, and with respect to the
conclusion we have to say, that it met
our approval and without any of the de-
mOnstrations the reporters fancy cre-
ated.
This article is supposed to be refec-
ton upon the court, and we are prompt
ed by the counsel to 30 consider it. 1t
does nOtsstrike us precisely In that right;
and, if it did, and the intentto make it so
were evident we should probably De able
to Withstand its power. If tile respect
which the public of this State have ever
had for their judiciary can be impaired
by newspaper ,aor others,
where there is 80 little ground of COM
plant as in this case, then tne present
generation must be woefully sunk in
point of intelligence. The people of
their independence of opinion % news
papers, nor allowed their judgment of
public men or measures to be made up
for themselves by writers in them; and
" think they never will. 1t Is not con.
sistent with the genius of this people
that any should dictate sentiment for
them; we have no fear that either the At
torney General, or the counsel for the
defense, or thisgcourt, will be condemned
because of anything contained in the ar
ticle in question or even that of any one
thatwill everbe written, where the motive
is maliceand the purpose is detraetion. g.
So far as concerns this court alone, we
have word to say. 1t is of the first I'M
portanc that the administration OF justice
shall be respected. Supposing its minis
ters to be competent, and to conduct
themselves properly in their ofhce, they
are to be treated as so far identified
with the judicial power of the State that
any attacks upon them IL a reflection al
so upon it. Whenever such Is made and
by whit person soever, we shall see to
it that the proper punishment is award
ed: for an affront to the administration OF
Justice is an attack upon the majesty
and dignity of the political society IN
which we live and must never be allow
ed with impunity.
Another word. We shall allow no re-
porter place in this room who presumes
TO criticize the propriety of the courts
proceedings. We should sink beneath
contempt if we did. If he wish TO in
Gulged in that he must not expect seat
here. And should such criticism reach
the polni of contempt we shall not hesi-
tate to apply the cans of protection the
law has furnished; tie use OF which nc
| tribune, but that of the public sitting as
a constitutional convention, or in its