The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-08-01
WHERE WE STAND.
The Vice Chancellor and the
Reporter-Rights and Duties
Of the Press.

'aThe Jersey City News Editorial in
Tuesdays Edition.
The action of Vice Chancellor Pitney
yesterday, in Newark, in forbidding a
newspaper reporter to publish certain
proceedings which took place publicly in
court would be amazing If it had not a
parallel in a similar attempt made by
the same gentleman in the Chancery
Court in this city. Some months ago,
it will be remembered, he ordered re-
porter of the Evening Journal to
punish him for contempt if he published
any part of the current proceedings.
At the time 1.-THE News" printed as
full report as possible of the proceed
ing in question, as well as of the Vice
Chancellor's extraordinary action. Com
menting editorially, this paper protested
in the most earnest and emphatic man
ner against any attempt to resurrect
Star Chamber methods in this State. 1t
of proceedings in all our courts, includ-
ing that of Chancery. It pointed out
that there was neither law, rule nor
precedent for a secret judicial hearing
and quoted the highest authority for
the opinion that even a hearing before
a Master, held in the private office of
such Master, was a public proceeding
from which the public, including the
press, could not be excluded.
the affair of the Newark Evening
News whose reporter was the victim
of the Vice Chancellor's unwarrantable
action. That paper is well able to take
care of itself and its reporters, and no
doubt will do so effectually. But in a
hardly less degree, the incident is the
concern of every newspaper in the State
which has a proper sense of its duty to
the public and of it's rights in the per-
formance of that duty. For one, ''The
Jersey City News conserving in all
respects its profound respect for the
Court of Chancery and the learned gen.
tlemen who make up its bench, protests
against the action of the Vice Chan
cellor 1t insists that the act was arbi-
trary and unjustifiable, and beyond the
proper exercise of the power of the Court.
If 1.-THE News" is mistaken in this it
stands ready to join with it's contempo-
raries in procuring from the Legislature
such enactments as may make secret
court proceedings impossible, as being
most imminently dangerous to the people
in any country.
In the case which was before the Vice
Chancellor the public had a deep in
terest, and there was no conceivable
ground of propriety, or of peril to private
character or property, which might make
the publication of the hearing an indis-
cretion. The case was an ordinary grade
crossing wrangle between two railroad
corporations. But that the proceedings
were worthy of publication and that there
were features in them not only of in
terest, but Importance to the citizens of
the State. is best illustrated in remark
made by Vice Chancellor Pitney himself
during their progress. His Honor is
quoted as saying:
The year 1895 is disgrace to the
present century in the manner in which
juries have been rendering verdicts
against railroad companies.
This is certainly a weighty contribution
to the thought of the day. Spoken ex
catheda from the bench of the highest
equity court in the State, it assuredly
affords rich food for public consideration.
For the sake of this one utterance alone,
it was the duty and the privilege of the
newspapers to be represented in that
court at that time.