The record-union., 1894-12-20
THE PRESS AND THE PHILBROOK
CASE.

HE PRESS AND THE PHlLBROOk
CASE.
We have in mind remarkable instance
of the perversity of certain of the press in
San Francisco in misrepresenting the
United States Court in the Debs case and
in catering to a disorderly and revolu-
tionary spirit. Another instance of this
dangerous drift is found in the Philbrook
contempt case now before the Supreme
Court of this State.
Certain of the San Francisco press not
only misunderstood that case and mis-
represent it TO the people. but they do so
willfully, though every facility is open to
them to ascertain the exact facts. Thus,
one of the daily papers of the metropolis
declares that the only thing the Supreme
Court can do is to permit Mr.. Philbrook
against Mr.. Justice Harrison" Another
sheet shouts that as Philbrook has
charged fraud upon MIR. Harrison while
he was practicing attorney and before
he came to the bench, that the thing to do
is to come forward and disprove it. Still
another declares that the Bar Association
is very quick to prosecute one ofits men,
bers who offends a court. but takes no
action in the case of others who are dis
honest. We are probably to conclude,
therefore. that the court offenders are
fn on oil to nd Of
discipline.
Whoever heard the full statement of
Mr.. Philbrook as made to the court on
Monday; whoever listened to the reading
OF his elaborate written answer in which
he sets up all he has TO plead in his own
behalf whoever, with the honest desire to
get at the facts, listened to his very long,
deliberate and explicit statement to the
court, occupying the larger portion of a
day, must be prepared TO say that such of
the San Francisco press as have COM
mented unfavorably to the court upon
the case have outrageously, danger
ously, and willfully misrepresented
the proceedings. These papers claim for
Philbrook things he does not claim for
himself; they suggest things and COM
ment upon them that are not in the case,
never were and never will be. Their
comments all go towards conviction of
the public mind that Philbrook is being
prosecuted; that someone is trying to
whitewash somebody else; that the Su-
preme Court is denying human right,
and that the offending attorney is pre-
vented from proving his case"
The truth is, that not before in the his
tory of the Supreme Court of this State
has such full and unrestrained liberty
been granted to any lawyer as has been
conceded to Mr.. Philbrook to make his
case. Not a single obstacle, he admits,
has been thrown in his way, nor has, he
says, moment of time been begrudged
him. His prosecutors solicited the court
TO give him all time and all process to
present his case, and the order was made
affirming the request. Philbrook himself
has not uttered one word of complaint
that he has been unable to set out his de-
fense. On the contrary, he presented in
print every particle of testimony taken
or that can be taken in the case out of
which his own arises, and there was not
entered to it a single objection. In short
the perfect freedom accorded him in the
court was phenomenal and unprece-
dented, though he abused the privilege
accorded, wearied the patience of the
most patient, and introduced matters as
foreign to the case as is the north star to
our planet.
The story of the Philbrook case may
be simply told. A mercantile firm
agreed in writing that on the death of
either partner the surviving partners
might succeed to the business of the firm.
after inventory taken according to usual
mercantile methods. One Of them died,
leaving a mother and sister as heirs.
After a time the executor of the will, un-
der advice of his attorney, who has since
been elevated to the Supreme bench by
the votes of the people, sold to the sur
ytying partners the interest of the deced-
ant according to the terms of the part
pership agreement on an inventory taken,
I'm which not 80 per cent, as is customary,