Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-11-13
WASHINGTON VIKINGS.
Judge Terry's Petition En-
phatically Refused.
A TELEPH0NE CASE DECISION
Alaska, Her Population, Prospects
and ResOuces-Capital
Notes
Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD

Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD. II
WASHINGTON, November l2.--The Su-
preme Court to-day rendered an adverse
decision in the case of. ex-Judge Terry,
of California, upon his application for
writ of habeas corpus, in which he al
leges his unlawful imprisonment under
the order of the United States Circuit
Court for t Northern District OF Cali
fornia, in the Jail of Alameda county.
After presenting the case made by the
application, the decision says: What
then are the grounds upon which the pc
titioner claims the Circuit Court was
without jurisdiction to make the order
committing him to Jail. They are
First-That the order was made in his
absence. Second-That it was made
without his having any previous notice
of the intention of the Court to take any
steps whatever in relation to the matters
referred to in the order. Third-That it
was made without giving any opportunity
of being first heard in defense of the
charges therein made against him.
The second and third of these may
be dismissed as immaterial in any
inquiry in which this Court is at liberty
upon this original application to make.
For upon the facts recited in the order of
confinement, showing that a case of con-
tempt was committed in the face of the
Court, which tended to destroy its author
ity and to embarass and obstruct it's busi-
ness by violent methods, the petitioner
was not entitled to the absolute right,
either to demand trial or to receive no.
tice, by rule, of the Courts intention to
proceed against him, for to any opportun-
ity to make formal answer to the
charge contained in the order of COM
mitment.
The decision says it is the general
rule that sentence is pronounced against
party in such case, without hearing
him or giving him an opportunity to be
heard This is not judicial determine
tion of his rights, and is not entitled to
respect in any other tribunal, but tie de-
cision declares, there is another
rule, which is equally vital
to personal liberty and the
privileges Of organized society. 1t
has relation to the class of coniempts
which, being committed in the face Of
the court, imply a purpose to destroy its
authority or to insult or to intimidate
those charged with the duty of admins
tering the law.
Numerous authorities and precedents
are cited, upon which the decision con-
cludes that it was competent for the Cir
cult Court Immediately upon the COM
mission, in its presence, ofthe contempt
recited in its order OF September 8, 1888,
to proceed upon its own knowledge OF the
facts, and ipiprison the offender without
further process, without issue or trial in
any form and says 1t was not bound to
hear any explanation Of his motives if
it was satlsfed-and we must con-
clusively presume that it was satisfied
from what occurred under it's own
eye and within it's hearing
that the ends of justice demanded
immediate action, and that no explana.
tion could mitigate the offense or dis
prove the fact that he had committed
such contempt as deserved instant pun.
ishment. Whether the facts really justi-
lied such punishment was for the Circuit
Court to determine. Its conclusion upon
such facts is not open to inquiry or re-
view in this collateral proceeding.
AS to the affirmation that the order of
September 3rd was void because it was
made in the absence of the petitioner,
the decision says The jurisdiction of
the person of the petitioner was attached
instantly upon contempt being committed
in its presence. That jurisdiction was
not surrendered, nor was it lost by any
delay in its exercising power to proce ed, |
without notice and proof, to immediate
punishment. The absence of the peti-
toner from the courtroom in another
room, near by in the same building at the
time the order was made, was q volun-
tary act. The petitioners misbehayior
in the presence Of the Court, his volun-
tary leaving OF the courtooom, his going
into the Marshal's room and the making
the order OF commitment were in sub. |
stance one occasion. They constituted
in legal effect one continuous, mplete
transaction, and the jurisdiction of the
Court to enter an order for the offenders
arrest and imprisonment was as full and |
as when he was in the court |
room IN the immediate presence of the |
Judges. The decision was made by JUS |
tice Harlan. Justice Field took no part
in the case.
oIhb iHisisAIiocE CAbE DEClbION.
Justice Miller, of the Supreme Court. |
rendered a decision in the suit of the |
United States against the Bell Telephone
Company, brought here on appeal from |
the decision of the Circuit Court of |
Massachuse rs, sustaining the demurrer |
entered by the Bell COMPANY to the Gov
ernment's suit. Justice Miller has de-
cided that the plea of multifariousness
sent by the Bell company does not hold |
good, and also that the Bell company's
that the United States has no |
right to begin suit to set aside the patent |
is not good. The decision is in favor of |
the United States. Justice Miller over
rules the decision Of the Circuit Court of
and the Court remands |
the case with instructions to entertain
the Government bill.
alaska.
SWtnefOrd,s Animal Re.