The age-herald., 1897-09-25
From the Chicago Tines-Herald.

From the Chicago Times Herald.
 The interesting opinion delivered by Judge winslow, of the supreme court of Wisconsin upon the rights of the press and the rights of judges and courts, and to what extent newspaper criticisms of Judges may go, will undoubtedly attract widespread attention.
 The courts and judges must have the power to enforce respect and punish acts or public criticisms that tend to bring reproach upon them interfere with the just performance of their duties cannot be denied. And yet there must be a limit to this power. Freedom or speech and of just criticism must also be preserved. Judges are not little tin gods on wheels" and the ermine is no panoply for unwisdom and lack of learning. To protect both-to restrain arrogance and judicial tyranny on the one side and unbounded license of com ment on the other-should therefore be the object of the law. The sense of jus tice that usually pervades a community draws the line in this respect very &C., curately. Everybody of intelligence knows that it is unjust and unfair on the press to discuss a trial in progress,
  Judges rulings or reflect upon the de- meanor of counsel. If this is not wrong nothing is wrong and it should be stay ed in the most peremptory manner. It never was tolerated in England, and many a newspaper editor or proprietor has been ''laid by the heels" for criti- cism on court proceedings far more harmless than that which daily appears in certain class of American newspa- pers.
 On the other hand, some of the meas ures of the English judges would not be endured in this country, any longer, at least, than would be necessary to get rid of the offending judge or give him a fright. Some of our federal judges in the past have had this kind of a lesson while our elective judges find them selves dropped at the next election.
 Judge Winslow goes into the question deeply and the decision of the court is undoubtedly law.
 Last spring Judge W. F. Bailey, of Eau Claire, was a candidate for re-elec- tion to the circuit bench. He was strong ly opposed, and in the course of the campaign his conduct on the bench and his fitness for the office was sharply criticised in the Eau Claire newspaper, both editorially and in communication signed by a prominent Wisconsin law yer. The court being in session, Judge Bailey chose to regard these criticisms as a contempt, and brought his offend ing critics before him for that offense. Thereupon they made affidavits to the truth of their statements, and this the judge decided was a contempt in the presence of the court, and sentenced them to thirty days in jail.
 This is the proceeding the supreme court has just reversed.
 Judge Winslow says:
 It must De a grievous and weighty me- cessity which will justify so arbitrary a proceeding whereby a candidate for of- flee becomes the accuser, judge and jury and may within few hours sum- marily punish his critic by imprison- ment. The result of such doctrine is that all unfavorable criticisms of a sit- ting judges past official conduct can be at once stopped by the judge himself, or if not stopped can be punished by immediate imprisonment
 And in this judgment both the bar and the country generally will concur.