The Bossier banner. [volume] (Bellevue, Bossier Parish, La.) 1859-1952, 1898-01-20
NOT CONTEMPT OF COURT.
Judges on the Bench Are Open tn
Reasonable Criticism.

Judges on the Bench Are Open ia
Reasonable Criticism.
The decision of the supreme court of
Washington in the now famous Eau
Claire contempt case not only makes
very interesting reading, but consti-
tutes one of the most emphatic vindica-
tions of the rights of free speech and
free criticism which we have had from
the bench in long time. 1t may be
well to recall the salient facts of this
remarkable case. Judge Bailey, of Eau
Claire, who was candidate for re-elec-
tion last spring, objected to certain edit
orials and communications in local
paper severely animadverting upon
his official conduct and methods. The
writer and editor having filed affi-
davits in contempt proceedings Tin
stituted against them by the judge), al
leging the truth of their charges of un-
fairness, partiality and incapacity
against Judge Bailey, he angrily re-
fused to proceed with the hearing, and
made an order adjudging his critics
guilty of contempt. The offenders were
to be committed to Jail, but writ of
prohibition from the supreme court
saved them from that punishment.
The supreme court, in reviewing the
case, points out the fact that the crit
icisms made upon Judge Bailey had no
reference TO any action of his in connec-
tion with the case then pending. Wheth-
er just or unjust, they were general in
their nature, and referred to past con-
duct. The court says it is well persuad-
ed that newspaper comments on
cases finally decided prior to the
publication cannot be considered Grim
inal contempt, and that they do not
obstruct the administration of Justice,
however much they may tend to pre-
judice the judge against whom they are
directed. While it is of the first impor-
tance that judges should perform their
grave duties unimpeded, it is equally
important that the right of citizens
and newspapers to criticise what they
deem arbitrary, unworthy and corrupt
conduct should be jealousy preserved.
The court says:
Truly, it must be grievous and
weighty necessity which will justify
so arbitrary proceeding whereby a can
didate for office becomes the accuser,
judge and jury, and may within few
hours summarily punish his critic by
imprisonment. The result of such a
doctrine is that all unfavorable criti-
cism of a sitting judges past official
conduct can be at once stopped by the
judge himself, or if not stopped, can
be punished by immediate imprison-
ment. If there can be any more eff
fectual way to gag the press and sub
vert freedom of speech we do not know
where to find it,"
This is stinging rebuke, but Justly
deserved, and one needed to remind
arrogant and dictatorial jurists that
they are no more above proper criticism
than any ordinary individuals. To
paraphrase the poet: mo di-
vinity doth hedge about judge" least
of ali at time when he is candidate
for Office. The law provides adequate
remedies for unjustifable attacks
upon their character, but does not per-
init the summary fining and imprison-
ment of critics, even when their criti-
cisms go beyond what may be deemed
proper limits, provided such animad-
versions do not clearly tend to obstruct
the administration of justice in then
pending case.-Albany Law Journal.