The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1894-04-27
SCOTS DECREE.
The Judge Reads the Press Moral Lee.
ture" Before Passing Sentences
Upon Edi ors Burke and Brown.

OKLAHOMA CITY, April 26-(SpeciaI-
The absorbing topic of conversation OF
the streets is the Burke and Brown case
The Jail was thronged yesterday with
friends of the gentlemen. Following is q
| summary of the decree of the court:
This is an original action for contempt
In the district court for tn.
third judicial district against the
defendants j. j. Burke and f.
F. Brown, publishers of the Oklahoma
Times J ouri O.. daily newspaper pub
lished III oklahoma City. Oklahoma
county, Oklahoma territory, in the juris.
diction of this court.
An Information WAS filed on the 23d day
of February. A. ID. 1894, and after hear
rug thereon, the d -fendant, were adj
Judged guilty of contempt and held for
judgment aud sentence of court there
for
Before proceeding TO pronounce judg-
ment Judge Scott said he felt, in view OF
the deep interest and concern apparently
manifested in the case, as we'll rs in the
case of tue Territory of Oklahoma vs..
Frank McMaster, that it would not be
inappropriate to deliver a few remarks,
notwithstanding some portions of the re-
marks of the court would be Ii transCrss-
sion of the record Ia the case. He then de-
livered lengthy dissertation upon the
prerosatives of the court and the liberty
of the press, and dwelt upon the abuse OF
the said liberty by portion Of the press of
Oklahoma i6 unduIy, and apparently for
partisan and personal ends, criticising tie
acts OF the court in n manner designed to
bring il into public contempt. At the
conclusion OF his prepared address Judge
Scott, addressing Messrs. Burke and
Brown. said:
Gentlemen, have either or both of you
ho l.
cause TO show why / snoulc not pronounce
judgment upon your
Mr.. Brown replied: "All these matters
alleged TO be contempt OF his court We're
published in the absence OF Mr. Burke.
He was out OF the city and knew nothing
about them aud was not in the city until
two days after. l have no apology 10
make"
BY the court: "Mr. Burke, what have
you 70 sayf"
Mr.. Burke: "Msy it please your honor.
| have no apology to make. / am one Of
the publishers of the Times-Journal, of
course. aud / shall take medicine along
with the other parties"
The co1rt: Having shown 10 legal
cause and having thus refused the uuex-
ampied tender of consideration, | have
this more TO say: 1t Is impossible for a
newspaper editor TO commit a more fla
grant contempt under all :he circum-
stances than ron committed N this case.
.Iour punishment should be To the
utmost limit of judicial discretion. About
this courts would differ. Some courts
might believe one year IN lsi. and 81 200
should be Inflicted; others that nine
months woa,,i be Sufficient, aud on down
10 Lesser punishment
with this court il should be simply
question OF your physical aud finanei-l
ability TO bear the penalty, for certainly
now The IL fiction Of punishment shall not
become q farce. and doubtless you s~ill be
compelled TO suffer the full judg meat Of
the court TO the letter.
''Iu view OF the fact that yor could Be
held TO answer for AZ hast too cases Of
Contempt toe court will Inf.ict upon
you an unusually licnt sentence. bat will
state Row that 4, after its execution. you
continue yolr assiolts upon this court
your puni>hnlent on other charges Wi!
only Be Limited By tire exercise Of moees-
are and sound discretion.
Il do therefore consider. order and ed-
judge that you, ik- sid J. J. Barre. and
yoG he said r + Brown, and each o. ron,
are guilty OF cont. nps 81 THIS conf. and II
j. therefore The Judgment. >eufeac= arr!
order OF this court "a, yen the said J. j.
Burke aud you the sss,i = T. Bxsua. sad
saca Of yor. i- itnprssoned IL The county
] ii Of Oklahoma coanry and territory Of
Oklahoma teE the period Of tea days be- ]