The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-06-02

action aforesaid and In pursuance Of
said combination and conspiracy the
defendants fabricated and procured
false and fraudulent testimony against
the plaintiff and procured the verdict
In favor Of the plaintiff to be set aside
THE case. being on the trial list, was
called. and the announcements made
that il would be tried before Judge Nc
Pherson. of Dauphin county. The re-
spondent made a motion for a change
of venue. which was denied: he then
declined to proceed with the case, and a
nOn-suit was entered in accordance
with the act of assembly, which non-
suit. after argument, was allowed to
stand.
CHARGES OFT REPEATED.
''The foregoing charges against the
members of this court especially the
charge against Judge Connolly have
been repeated from time to time. in
various forms and in various petitions
and affidavits. and We're reiterated by
the respondent In open court in his final
argument on the present rule. The
conduct of the respondent for the past
for years, whenever concerned In the
Jennings cases, has disclosed constant
and persistent purpose to attack the in
teerity of the court. This conduct is
evidence as to the motives Of the re-
spondent in making the attack, which
Is the subject matter of the inquiry now
before us.
AS a further justification for the
Judgment was intended to enter in this
case and as an illustration Of the atti-
tude and animus Of the respondent we
refer to his remarks in open court in de-
fense of his position. Whatever force
his apology which Is on record might
have had has been completely nullified
by his declarations in his argument.
His plea is an attempt to justify every
attack made by him upon the members
of the court. These attacks We're re-
peated with aggravation emphasized
with argument and invective and the
principles governing and protecting the
relation of an attorney to the court
were definitely violated. Respondents
argument is a part of the record Of the
case and need not be referred to fur
ther in this connection.
Having discussed some Of the facts
Of this case we shall now proceed to
questions of law.
1.-The respondent evidently miscon-
ceives the law and practice of thescourts
of this state In denying the right of this
court to sit In Judgment upon him in
the present case. In every case of this
nature, involving the relation of an at
torney to the court in which he prac-
tices, the court whose integrity Is ques-
toned or attacked Is the proper author
tiles to dispose of the case. We know
Of no case in the Supreme Court where
an exception has been made to the au-
thority Of the court sitting under such
circumstances. 1t is an unpleasant
duty imposed upon judges and courts
and 1t Is a duty founded in reason
However disagreeable the performance
of this duty may be, 1t would he the ex-
ercise of a weak discretion to impose
upon some other judge a responsibility
we are unwilling to assume ourselves.
An attorney Is an officer of the court.
He has sworn fidelity to the court. The
court Is the best judge Of his conduct.
HAVE EXCLUSIVE POWER.
Courts of record and of general ju-
risdiction are vested with exclusive
power to regulate the conduct of their
/, own officers, and in this respect their
decisions are put on the same footing
with that numerous class of cases which
Is wisely cOnflded to the legal discre-
jurisdiction over the subject matter
Mclaughlin case, s w. & S., 272
1T was late as 1879 that the legisla-
ture wisely passed an act Of assembly
| allowing an attorney n writ of error, so
that the Supreme Court could fully re-
view the action of the court below in
cases Of this nature.
THE power of Il court to admit as an
attorney to its bar a person possessing
the requisite qualifications. and to re-
move therefrom when found unworthy,
has always been recognized and cannot
be questioned. This power of removal
for just cause Is as necessary as that of
| admission for due administration of
law. In Re Samuel Davis, SO Pa, 1l6.
mo Judge Is bound to admit, or can
be compelled to admit, person to prac-
tice law, who is not properly qualified.
or whose moral character Is bad. The
profession of the law Is one Of the high
/ est and noblest in the world. The at
torney is an officer of the court and Is
brought into close and intimate reia-
be admitted or whether he shall be dis
barred is a judicial question for the
court. Splanis case, 1923 Pa, 527.
| Numerous other cases could be cited
showing that the question Of disbarring
an attorney for unprofessional conduct
Is peculiarly q matter to be considered by
the court before whom he practices his
profession. The respondent made a
motion for change Of venue. This
motion was refused because we did not
consider the present inquiry as comm
| WltulH tIt VI tIlc IdW
ing to a change of Venue, and even If by
any rule Of construction it could be held
to come within the purview of this law,
the allowance of the motion would not
have been In keeping with the exercise
of wise and responsible discretion.
DISCUSSION NOT NECESSARY.
1T is not necessary to discuss at any
great length the duty Of an attorney in
l. Ilz,., aI.kt - ,,,.t tp
briefly comDrehended In the terms OF
his oath. to behave himself in the Of
| flee of the attorney, according to the
best of his learning and ability, and
with all good fidelity as well to the
court as to the client
The respondent appears to have mis-
apprehended the nature of the oath he
has taken, for he says that If fidelity
to my client came in contact with tidel-
ity to the court. then l say it Is fidelity
to my client every time: and If l must
sink for that, let me sink. Talk about
fidelity to the court, fidelity to my client
is my first allegiance. as l understand
my profession, and that ! must stand
by, lead them where it will On thi.
question we quote the appropriate
words of Gibson, G. j., in Rush VS.
Cavenaugh, Pa, 1877: 1T is popular
but gross, mistake to suppose that 8
lawyer owes no fidelity to any one ex-
cept his client: and that the latter /.
the keeper of his professional con-
science. He is expressly bound by his
official oath to behave himself in his
office of attorney with all the fidelity
to the court as well as to the client.
ITO say that the office of an attorne!
Is an important and highly honorable
one is to repeat what has been Otter
said by the highest judicial authorit!
in the state. 1t sustains an important
relation in the administration of JUS
tice AS was said by Justice Mercur
He Uhe attorney possesses certain
powers and privileges from which
others are excluded and assumes i'm.
portant duties and obligations toward.
both court and client. He IL an Officer
of the former, and a representative O,