The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1895-12-25
PUNISHMENT FOR CONTEMPT.

The decision OF the supreme Noui
of North Carolina. overruling Judge
Fwart in his sentence OF Editor Robin
son of the Ashevile Citizen, to thirty
DAYS Imprisonment in jail for criti-
Ching the action OF the court i'll re-
moving trial from Buncombe coun-
ty. is along the new line of modern
decisions.
There is every reason why Il Judge
should be permitted to punish for con-
tempt that enbarrasseS the regular
proceedings Of the court, but the old
rule. still in vogue in most States, that
an editor. who cr,ticizeS Il judicial
decision. can be sent TO jail for con
teni)t Is suited better for the days OF
.jeffrevs than this era of modern Jour
uaIiSn4. Outside the courtroom
Judge is no aasrc entitled by reason to
punish for contempt than any other
public official He ought to stand up
like a man and receive criticism, know
ing thai 1he 1nan or paper that wan
tonk assais his judicial actions VIII
suffer in public condemnation. If
Editor Robinson had unjustly assalled
Judge Ewart, the public would have
condemned the paper; but when the
new Judge, clothed in little brief
authority, tried to humiliate an hon
est editor for an honest and temperate
criticism of the action of the judge,
the public cried out against such otfi-
cial tyrrany.
The Supreme Court hold in this case
that as to those contempts that are
committed in the presence of the court
that tend to embarrass its proceedings
or hinder its discharge of duty, the
right to punish for contempt is inner
ent in the court and essential TO its eS-
istence and cannot be taken away BY
the Legislature, even if ii should at
tempt 1T. which has not been done.
Bat "a TO those conternpts which are
committed out of the presence of the
court and which are called contempts
only because they tend 10 bring into
oisrepute the court, such us the news
paper criticisms Of the presiding judge
in this case, the Legislature has power
to provide in what cases, if any, the
court can punish The Legislature Of
North Carolina has provided that in
this class Of eases there can be no pun
ishnleIt If the respondent answer un-
der oath that he did not intend to
bring the courtinto disrepute, and the
| editor Of the Citizen, having thus an
severed in this case. Is entitled to be
discharged.
On the 10Th cl,s OF April, 1869, an
article appeared in the Raleigh Senti-
mel, signed ~ 10l members of the bar
Of tie state. protesting against the
| participation of Judges in the strife OF
| political contests. In that day Of par
| tisan rancor the judges threw aside
| the ermine'' and rushed into the mad
contest Of politics under the excite
nent Of drums and flags" The protest
/ was vigorous. caustic, and severe, and
was signed by b. T. Moore, 4. 5. Merri-
mon. Il. Is. Vance, Thomas bragg. T. q.
| Haywood. ". a. Montgomery and
| others OF the most eminent members
| of the bar in all sections of the State.
The Supreme Court made rule
nis. to-wit, that the attorneys signing
| the protest bedisabled from practising
until the matter was disposed OF. They
| we're all permitted upon making dis
| ayowal of any intention TO commit
contempt Of the Supreme Court to be
excused. to quote Judge Pearson,
but mot acquitted, Judge Pearson
| saving: .. ..... the party 49,. IS al
lowed to try himself. His intention
is locked within his own breast, is
known to himself alone, and he is per-
mittpd to purge himself by his own
ayoyval. He cannot be convicted, if he
is innocent, as ne may be by false eyi-
dence, before 4 jury For the court
does not try him, ne tries himself.
we have heard that some of the
lawyers who signed the protest re-
fused to disaNow their intention oil
contempt, among them Hon. Asa
Biggs. who moved 10 Norfolk, Va, te
practice law.
We have not read the full text OF the
I