The record-union., 1896-06-06

the Judge with uttering specified raise
hoods from the bench in regard to evil
dence pertinent to issues in the course
Of trial then pending, and in Ian
guage coarse, violent, insolent and In
sulting, such as the writer of them
would not dare to address personally
to any high-minded person on thS
street or elsewhere. They are repeated
with an evident malicious intent IN
three consecutive issues of the paper
and are directed at the Judge person
ally, and at one of the attrneys for the
plaintiff in the action on trial. They
are direct and unlawful interferences
with the proceedings Of the court In
said action.
THE court has the power to protec,
itself, and parties litigant with theil
attorneys before it, against all such in
references and insults. If it had not
it would be too contemplate TO De the
subject of contempt. If it had not this
power it would be powerless to freely
administer Justice. The rights of the
private citizen in the enjoyment of his
property and liberty depend-not upor
the executive nor upon the legislative
branches of the Government, but upon
SAC - III AoIJ
among the many imposed upon me by
the Constitution and laws more impera-
tive than that of upholding the author
ity and character of this court by al
the means in its constitutional powers
to the end that it's efficiency and power
to protect private property and indi-
vidual liberty shall not be restrained
or impaired.
'As a court of the highest Original
jurisdiction under the Constitution, anc
as one of the three equal coordinate
powers of the Government, it is enti-
tied to the confidence and respect OF
every good citizen; and he who denies
this, and willfully seeks to impair the
just influence of the court in the exer,
else of its functions, no matter from
what cause the intent may spring, is ar
enemy to the State and to society"
THE DECISION.
The Judge then read the following
decision:
In the matter of the contempt Of c
K. McClatchy: Upon the investigation
Of the charges made herein in the affi
davit of Charles T. Jones filed hereir
on the I'd day of June, 1896, and the
answer of said C. K. McClatchy filed
herein on the 4th day of June, 1896
and the evidence heard, the court finds
and adjudges as follows:
First-On the 9th of May, 1896 there
was pending and being tried in the Su
perior Court of Sacramento County be-
fore A. P. Catlin, one of the Judges Of
said court, an action entitled Talmadge
VS.. Talmadge ct al. Upon said trial
c. V. Talmadge one of the defendants
testified as a witness in his own behalf
In the afternoon of the following day
the 2Sth of May, there was published ir
a newspaper published in the city o1
Sacramento daily Sundays excepteO
known as the Evening Bee" a pre-
tended report of the said testimony o1
G. V. Talmadge, a part of which report
was in the words following, to wit:
THE most dramatic scene was wher
Talmadge attacked Charles 7. Jones
attorney for Mrs. Talmadge. He de-
clared that at one time Jones had
'gouged' him out of $4,000 and at an
other time he had paid him and I. j
Simmons 81, 700 for nothing. The story
oi this alleged later transaction was
brought out on cross-eXamination. Tai
madge said that he had at one time
visited a crib on lower L street, and the
woman in the crib afterward claimed
to have obtained some letters from him
which she intended using to make
trouble for him He told his troubles
tc Attorney Jones, who agreed to help
him out. A few days later Jones told
him that he had engaged detective
named Simmons to get the letters back
and Talmadge would have to pay Sim
none S540. He consented to this, and
later Jones told him that the woman
would settle for 5000. He paid this
amount and afterward Jones showed
him the letters, and he saw that they
were forgeries. He explained this tc
jones, but the latter said that made nc
difference, as the woman could have
used them in court. Jones then de.
manded and received a fee of $780,
Second-Tnat on the following morn
ing, the Doth of May, at the opening Of
the said court, and while said actor
was on trial, j. b. Devine, one Of the at
torneys for the plaintiff in said action
addressed the court, and after reading
from said newspaper the report above
set forth, spoke of it to the court in the
following words, to wit:
After consultation with my associate
Charles T. Jones, to whom this article
refers, we have thought proper to draw
it to the attention of the court, in view
of the fact that the statement con-
tained in this paper is a base fabrica-
| ton, and is wholly unwarranted by any
testimony that was produced upon the
stand here yesterday, or at any time
since the trial of this case. 1t contains
such gross, unwarranted, cruel and in
decent aspersion upon Mr.. Jones that
think it proper to draw the attention OF
the court to set Mr.. Jones right before
the public, that the court may state that
no such testimony was given, and there
was no testimony introduced in this case
that would warrant any such article.
Mr. Jones stands at the bar well
known to your honor and everybody in
this county, and the whole bar through
out the State Concerning his standing
as to professional integrity, l think he
il the peer of any member of the bar
in this State. The article to which I al
lude is so cruel, so indecent, so unwar-
ranted and such a gross imputation OF
professional wrong to Mr.. Jones, ]
think it is no more than right that the
court should say from the bench it be-
lieves it to be false and unwarranted.
Il don't know from where or from
what source the reporter who penned
this article obtained his information. Al
the time Mr.. Talmadge was testifying
concerning some other matters, the re-
porter who wrote this article for publ
cation in the Bee (Mr. Brown, l be-
lieve, is his name), was not in the court
/ saw him come into court after Mr. Tai