The morning call., 1893-09-12
COURT REPORTS.
Shortridge Not Guilty of
Contempt.
Decided That He Was Justified in
Publishing Testimony i'm a
Divorce Proceeding.

The long expected decision in the case
of Charles NJ. Shortridge. editor of the San
Jose Mercury, who appealed from judg-
ment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara
County fning him 500 for contempt of
court, was rendered yesterday by the SUI
preme Court of this State, which adludged
ShOrtridge not guilty.
The contempt in question arose out OF
The trial of the divorce case of Price vs..
Price, wherein the court was advised that
the evidence would be of a filthy nature,
and on that account Issued an order pro-
hibiting the publishing IF the case apd ex-
Guiding all persons from the courtroom ex-
cept the officers of the court and the par
ties to the suit and their counsel.
The very next day ShOrtridge published
in his paper a full account OF the testi-
mOny in the case, and on that account he
was cited for Contempt OF court. His de-
tense was that be had the right To publish
the evidence in a case which was before
the public, and that no insult TO the court
was meant by his act. However, Judge
LOriGan of the SUPERIOR Court of Santa
Clara County thought otherwise and fined
ShOrtridge 500 Tor contempt. From this
decision Shortrdge appealed aud this APP
veal was contested on the ground that
ShOrtridge's transgression came under
- y u u
in That ii nterfered with the judicial pro
ceedBgs Besides, it was cOntended that
the publication OF such matter had bad
influence upon the morals of the people
and their children.
In regard 10 the section quoted from The
Code of Civil Procedure the Supreme
Court decided that the meaning of the sec
ton was TO preserve decorum in trials Of
this description and to protect witnesses
of a sensitive nature who would not bear
the thought of having their disclosures
m ade public; but on the other hand The
people had the right to know what was
going on in the courts. The old theory of
government which invested royalty with
an assured perfection, precluding the pos
sibiity of wrong and denying the right to
discuss its conduct of public affairs. is OPP
/ posed 10 the genius of our institutions, in
/ which the sovereign will of the people is
/ the paramount idea. and the greatest pub
/ Lefty To the acts of those holding positions
4 Of public trust, anS, He greatest freedom
IL the discussion .ts-nr'ses efr1ss "
public tribunals ttat q consisi a with
truth aud deceney are regarded as essential
I TO the public welfare.
The court then proceeded to review the
/ Barry contempt act and its bearing upon
the present case.
/ The Court said: "A recent act of the
/ Legislature provides that no speech or
publication rejecting ON or concerning
]
/ or punished ns contempt of said court
unless made in the immediate pres ence OF
/ such court while in session and in sucn
manner as TO actually interfere with Its
1 proceedings. NoauthOritv has been found
which denies the inherent right Of a court
I in absence of limitation placed upon il
by the power which created it TO punish
as contempt TN act. whether committed in
| or out of rs presence, which tends TO I'M
pede, embarrass or obstruct the court in the
discharge OF its duties"
Following this argument. the court said
that If it had been found that ShOrtrdge
so impeded the court he must be found
guilty OF contempt. But on no account
must the right of Tree speech be interfered
with, and with the moral aspect of the case
the court had nothing to do. Testim ony
given in court Of justice was not vol
untary discussion among disinteresteC
parties. and therefore the publication 81
such testimony was not the expression o.
any opinion whatsoever upon such case.
Finding. therefore, that ShOrtrldGe haC
not abused his privilege as an American
citizen nor as the proprietor of a daily
newspaper in giving to the world the par
tienlars Of case which was before the
public, and therefore public property, The
Supreme COu ri set aside the judgment o
Judge Lorigan and acquitted ShortIidge
, Of the charge.
Justice Paterson wrote the opinion and
Justices del Haven, Fitzgerald, Harrison
and Mcfarland cOucnrred.