The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-01-06


Superior Judge before whom auy litiga-
ton concerning the matter might come
would be deferred from doing right by the
knowledge that one of the consplrators
was Justice of the Supreme Court, and
that upon appeal the other justices of
this court would be swerved from their
duty. because one of the alleged conspira-
tors would be associated with them on the
bench. And it is contended that on &C.
count of this imaginary state of facts,
founded on no evidence, respondent had
free rein to indulge in whatever insulting
and contemptuous language his fancy may
coniure up concerning Justice of this
court"
The Supreme Court here Quotes speci-
mems of the Objectionable language con-
tanned in the brief, such as, .sThe secret
transactions of September g." 'the most
unspaakably impudent and wicked BUSH
ness" could o more villalnous deed than
that be conceived ?' sit was done GRIMM
ally. ard it was necessary to the scheme
that Ralph c. Harrison should become
Justice of the Supreme Court" "why ex-
pect men to wear themselves out with the
Incorporate study of law books as they
have hitherto been written when there is
Open the easier, surer and more prof able
field of low cunning by which helpless
women and fatherless children may be be-
trayed, robbed and made outlaws by one
single stroke?" The foregoing are some
of the choicest expressions quoted from
Philbrook's brief
The court remarks: The foregoing
quotations give fair idea of the charac-
ter of the brief and of the temper and
animus which inspired it; aud in all that
respondent has presented in his answer,
in his argument and in the several
anscrIpts which he made part of his
answer he has been unable to show any
nTntn fnr hn mt
rageuus verbal assaults which he has
made upon member of this court.
The conduct OF the respondent is, beyond
doubt, entirely on the side of unbridled
license.
"Of course, the fact that an attorney
has been elected Justice of this court
does not shield him from any fair criti-
eism OF his conduct when an attorney;
but when there IS such warrantable
language as that used by respondent it is
manifest that IL was used because the per-
son assaulted is Justice of this court and
with intent to commit contempt of this
court. AS respondent has assailed in the
same connection not only all the members
of this court and the TWO Superior Judges
above referred to, but also certain reputa-
bic lawyers who were at one time asso-
ciated with him in the litigation and a
special administrator who was appointed
at his own instance and out of his own
office, charity might possibly suggest that
he is the victim of abnormal suspicion
and dstrust.
But no such defense is made: and.
moreover, his brief and argument show
bright intellect and a clear mind. His
conduct, therefore. exhibits only sheer
intent to be maliciously contemptuous.
"With respect 10 the other members of
the court The language of the brief is not
only generally contemptuous, but contains
direct attempt TO influence them by
threats of injury unless they shall adopt
his views of tue case. He says in his brief:
And let this be borne in mind by every
Justice who takes part in the decision.
You we're not, any more than /. either
directly or indirectly, a party to the secret
transaction of September G. $780, And
we that have free souls, IL touches
us not 1t will never be in any, even
the slightest, degree your act your child,
nor will you in even the slightest
degree be responsible for it, unless you
adopt it as your own. Though il is lure,
pre- AIRED to be held out to you as a lure,
it touches you not unIess you accept it,
"And again, having said that it is not
enough for courts to be pure, bntthat u ere
must pa the fullest confidence in their
purity he says: But if this recent trans
action of September 6, 1890. is not de-
clared Illegal and void upon the rules aud
principles declared In Egerton VS.. Carl
Browniow, then all to whom knowledge of
the case may come will no longer merely
suspect or even think that the courts may
be corrupted; they will know it; they
may point to the decision here as full proof
of it; for it will be established that such
practices are permissible, and if permissi-
BILE they are sure to have their effect
'Fhis,' says the Supreme Court 's a
palpable attempt to influence decision of
this court oy base appeals to the supposed
timidity Of its Justices-and made, too, by
an officer of the court
st is intolerable.
at cannot be suffered by any occupant
of the. bench who has just sense of his
duty to the people to preserve the due
dignity of their co urts and the free course
OF justice.
IAN attempt to Influence a Judge
through fear OF physical injury is no
graver offense than such an attempt upon
his reputation"
In conclusion the Supreme Court re-
marks: I'VE exceedingly regret the ne
cessity of this proceeding. 1t would have
been much more agreeable for US to have
devoted the time given 10 It's hearing to
other business. But to have overlooked it
would have been TO violate our duty, in vite
future disresp ect and indignities and
establish precedent which would have
embarrassed the court If offenses OF SIM
ton In the future.
ut may not be out of place to say that
we have been lenient to the respondent for
past offenses of character similar to the
one now before US, though not so fragrant !;
and that his attention has heretofore been
directly called to his disregard of his du-
ties as an attorney in this respect.
SIN a petition for rehearing he used dis
respectful language toward a Commits
sioner of this court who had prepared the
opinion in the case for which, perhaps, he
should have been called TO account at the
time, and more recently we were COM
PEELED to strike out his brief In another
case for disrespectful language. And
even now we regret that we cannot see
some escape from the necessity of i'm
posing the penalty which seems to be i'm
perativelv demanded.
"Our conclusion is that by fling said
brief the respondent, Philbrook, has yio-
lated his duty as an attorney TO maintain
the respect due 70 the courts OF justice and
judicial officers aud TO abstain from
offensive personality, and to advance no
fact prsjudical to the honor or reputation
of a party or witness unless required by
the justice Of the cause with which ne is
charged as declared in section 282 of the
Code OF Civil Procedure, and that Tor such
reason be should be suspended from his
office as attorney OF law.
1T is ordered and adjudged that the said