The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-12-04
PUNISHMENT FOR CoNTEkPT.

I
tempt. Chicago has been stirred in tie
past few weeks by the sending u jail
/ OF the managing editor OF Hearst =
Chicago American and a reporter On
that paper for reflections upon the
honesty OF a judge in the Windy City
The consensus OF opinion as gatAcr--
in print is that the power TO pua.=l
for contempt should be restricted. The
Sacramento Bee. in an editorial a f=W
days ago takes this view, and says that
this Furnishing power is now too great.
The Bee says:
While it IS proper and necessary that
some exercise of this immemorial judi
Cial Fis.t sEgua be permitted, no msl
| should be allowed unbornded arb trlry
power TO Serve as judge and jury In his
own case.
Recently n Chicago Judge sent need 10
J Imprisonment FOR terms Of thirty and
/ forty days respectively the reporter who
/ wrote, and the managing editor VINO
published IN the Chicago American an
article containing gross reflections upon
| that same judge. because of a decision
| rendered by him in favor Of local gas
! company.
I sci for the newspaper admitted that the
attack was brutal, but argued that the
/ judges remedy was by proceedings for
| criminal libel, as IN the case o. private
persons aggrieyed by such a publication.
II was argued that If any court which
may feel fancy itself aggr-ev shall
act as the sole and final arbiter IN its
own case. great wrong and Unjust &c may
often be done.
With the merits OF the Chicago case
we have nothing to do. 1t may be that
the attack upon the integrity or indie
pendence of the judge was wholly I'M
warranted in which event the paper,
or those of its staff who may be person
ally responsible, certainly deserve pun
ishment But II should be plain to any !
reasoning person that this power to pun |
ish for contempt is dangerous wea pom |
in the hands CT a corrupt Judge. Ana |
we all know there are such juTists. Now !
if a rascally judge sells a decision in a /
case in which the public interests are at /
stake thereby disgracing his high call |
ing and infi!cting a shameful wrong upon
the public, should he have the power to |
punish reporters and editors who tell the |
truth about him? no. Is it to the inter
est of the judiciary, as body, or of the
people, that a judge should be enabled
to escape press criticism for an infamous
betrayal Of his high duties?
So long as every judge from the hgh-
est 10 the lowest, Shall have the arb ira /
~ right to throw into Jail any writer or Il
publisher who may venture to accuse
him Of wrong-dOing on the bench, wheth-
er the accusation be truthful Or untruth-
I
giants cannot be properly guarded. ,
Here and there may be found an edi-
tor or a Publisher willing to go to jail
for a month or year, from a sense Of ,
duty to the public, but such examples OF
moral heroism are rare. So il often hap
pens that a scoundrel upon the bench :
gives decisions that are VIGOROUSLY cor :
rupt, escapes censure from the press, and }
repeatedly trails the judicial ermine in
the mire. ,
Is a court or a judge ever INDICATED ;
before the people by the exercise of its
arbitrary power to punish for criticism? ,
No. In the great majority of instances
the judge wreakS vengeance, and that Is y
all. He cannot, in the nature of the case, I
be impartial and just, unless he be an 7
exceptional man. And If he be a rogue, T
from the exposure of ras- r
caiity, he IS certain to again violate JUS :
tice by infiicting heavy punishment for ID
the contempt which he richly deserves. +
He IS no more indicated than he would I
be were he to assault and beat his &C
cuser. Is the burglar INDICATED when he |
shoots the policeman?
We doubt if ever an honest judge was |
hurt in public estimation by an untruth-
full or unfair criticism of a decision. In
the Chicago case it Is probable that the
newspaper was more injured in the eyes I
Of the people than the judge who was {
provided the latteI's reputation O
was previously good. The public are :
quick to sympathize with judge. from =
he peculiar nature of his position and re-
possibilities.
Readers will understand that In any b
proceeding the person cited to q
appear IS simply called upon to show
cause to the court why he should not be
punished. And this showing relates ?
merely TO Identification and personal re-
sponsibnity. The truth of the matter
complained II cannot be shown by the d
fF~ratF ton nf nun H.
nent Unless the accused person can
prove that he is In no wise responsible y
,or the writing or publication that gives o
,ffense to the court-perhaps from Its Z
very truthfulness-he is at the mercy Of ..
he accuser. and may by him by sent to -,
all for months. u.
In a trial for criminal libel, on the 9TH L
r. hand the truth may be presented TO {
he Jury. in California and other states, n
hough the maxim of the old common L
aw was that 1.-The greater the truth the p
greater the libel" And in this state the II
aw is that if the jury find the matter 81
charged as libelous IS true, and was pub r.
ished with good motives and for justi- ~
liable ends, the accused shall be acquit- 9
ed. Furthermore, the jury have the =
light 10 determine both tic law and the "
act. C
What a contrast between this fair and %
ust law and the irresponsible arbitrary Isl
,ower exercised by a judge in contempt al
roceed. ngs, where he IS both judge and p
uTy. from whose decision there is no
ppeal! to
If all judges were fair and honest. the ia
over 10 punish for contempt might safe 81
y be left as il is. 1t Is no more than dc
he due of certain high-minded jurists Ito
D say that in contempt proceedings IN III
Giving personal Offense to themselves as
hey would be lenient to the offender. Ide
Or fear of being biased by personal feel ii,
lg. But there are judges who, though 20
onest are v.ndicive and grossly unfair. nj
nd there are judges who are neither ia
onest nor fair. In their hands the pow 81.
r TO punish for contempt is comparable tn
o a club in the hands of A robber; il m
dds TO their capabi.ity of mischief. Be iGi
ause of such judges there is need Of re Of
orm IN regard 10 contempt proceedings III
The best remedy for the ex sting abuse to
lay be 10 COnfine judges in the case OF II