The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1901-12-18
JUDGES AND NEWSPAPERS.

In Albany, some years ago, county
judge-w9 think Clute was the name
of him-decided that the conductors
of the Journal newspaper of that city
had committed contempt of court.
They had criticised an effort on his
part to mandamus a Legislature, or
to do some other very ambitious thing.
The conductors of the paper were
hailed before him for condign punish
nment. But a hard-sensed higher
Judge bluntly decided that contemp of
court must be committed i'll court or,
if committed outside, must be com
mitted against court, during period
in which the court was doing some
thing and with reference to the free
dom Of action of the court to do that
specific thing The Journal was not
in court.
1t made no comment on what the
Judge had done until after he had
done it. AS a fact what he did was
sponged out or so scornfully disre-
garded by the Legislature that it ma
terialized to nothing.
The higher court further decided
that judges completed action could
be criticised the same as that of a
governor, of a legislature, of may
cial, and that, if the criticism was
libellous, the editor could be prose-
cuted by criminal indictment or sued
for damages in civil action In
short, a judge was no more immune
from criticism than any one else, on
any completed conduct or decision of
his. This had the effect of chilling
Clute, of commencing the higher ju-
dietary of protecting the press in its
rights, and of showing to aggrieved
| judges, or to any other aggrieved
| folk, their criminal or civil remedy
for real or supposed injury.
That was and remains, the law of
New York state. Out in Illinois late
| ly, Judge named Hanecy, declared
the owner and editors of the Chicago
American to be guilty of contempt for
comments by pen and pencil upon
something which he had done or said.
He sentenced them to Jail for vary
ing periods for doing so and was APP
plauded by quite number of those
who did not like the Chicago Ameri-
can, including several of the business
rivals of that sheet.
We are glad, however, to say that
another judge, apparently of high
er court, named Dunno, has set Han
eCy dSlue on BrOuuuS Well WOTbn HOb-
ing. Judge Dunno did not want to
upset Judge Hanecy at all Still he
did upset him, because 1.-THE vital
principle involved in the case was the
liberty of free speech and of free
press, carefully and zealously guarded
by the Constitution of Illinois and of
the United States and by the well
considered decision of the Supreme
Court of Illinois, He further de.
clared: public officials of all de-
grees always have been and always
will be, subject to criticism because OF
their official acts, as one of the Incl
dents or burdens of public life. If the
criticism was just it would commend
itself and be effective. If unjust anC
unfair it would fail to injure the MAJ
assailed " And the Judge might have
added, land it will not fail to injur'
the assailants themselves. " TheI
he goes on to say "There is no goot
reason why a judge should have {
different law applied to him from
that applied to President, a governo
or member of legislature. "
This decision is fundamental, i'm
portant, correct, exemplary, and IA
reaching. Judge Hanecy is either
of Illinois and of the United States
He can sue the Chicago American
folk for libel or write to them "a let
. ter defending his action and exposing