The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-03-14
Continued from page II

1883, see chapter ~. Laws of 1883, which
provides, section /. that 1.-The publica-
ton of the proceedings before any
court or judge shall not be deemed to
De contempt, nor shall such publica-
ton be punishable for contempt" Sec
ton ?. Constructive contempts shall
| not be punishable as such"
We are OF the opinion that section
and section of the Act of 1883 must be
construed together under the familiar
principle of law that statutes in pari
materia must be construed as a whole
The constructive contempts which are
declared not to be punishable as SUCH
IN section of the Act of 1883 mani
testify refers to section l of the same
act, which declares that the publication
or the proceedings before any court
shall not be punishable as contempt
The right then to publish proceedings
of court-truthful and fair proceed
lngs-the truthful and fair report of
the proceedings of the court, substan-
TALLY accurate reports, is a right which
Is expressly given to the citizen by
the laws of this Territory, and il is a
right which this court cannot impinge
upon even if it were so disposed. But
this right is limited to a substantial
accurate publication of the proceedings,
and where the publication does not
consist or purport to consist of pub
LEGATION of the proceedings. but con-
sists of invention and of falsehood
calculated to bring the courts into
odium, hatred. ridicule and contempt,
| thereby embarrassing the influence OF
the courts, obstructing and impeding.
embarrassing and hindering the admin
istration of justice, il is a contempt,
and punishable as such under our la VS..
Now, in the State against the Bee
Publishing Company. Lawyers Reports
Annotated, volume 30, page 1877. ii ap-
l-peared that the publication was made
with reference to a pending case. The
editor of the paper was cited to show
cause in that proceeding why he should
not be dealt with as and for a con-
tempt of court. He appeared in court
by counsel and defended the action
against him upon the grounds that no
oisreSpect 10 the court or to any men,
Der of the court was intended; that the
case of the State VS.. Smyth was not
pending; that the publications were
made with good motives, and were not
calculated to obstruct the due admins
tration of justice" The Kennedy case
was pending. OF that, said the court.
we have judicial knowledge, and the
defendant must surely have known
that the case was in court and unde-
termined. for ii appears that the at
torney for respondents brought his
brief to Mr.. Rosewater's office. and that
the article headed Worthy of Serious
Consideration" Immediately followed
a meeting between the editor and the
lawyer.
The defendant in this case has not
taken the stand. He personally has
not denied under his corporal oath in
the vision of this court that he had
no knowledge of the tendency of the
case of the Territory of Hawaii against
Mccarthy. The copy of his paper
which contains the contemptuouS car
toon in question also contains. in an
other column, notice of the fact that
this case is pending. and that jury
had been sworn in the cause for the
purpose of trying it.
The first and third defenses are puer-
lie: they amount to a denial that the
defendant intended to violate the law.
Under the conceded facts the course
pursued by him was indefensible. His
conduct is not susceptible of an innocent
or honorable construction. The statute
declares that any wilful attempt to OBJ
struct the proceedings or hinder the
due administration of justice in any
suit proceedings, or process pending
before any court shall constitute a
criminal contempt and be punished as
such.
This statute is merely declaratory of
the law as it has existed for hundreds
of years. 1t is a legislative recognition
of the authority of the courts to deal
in a summary manner with persons
who do any wanton, deliberate or in
territorial act calculated to embarrasS
them in the discharge of their inpor-
tant duties. In the history of Ameri-
can Jurisprudence there can be found
no case in which this power has been
harShly or progressively exercised by
court of final jurisdiction. Indeed, such
courts have not often called publishers
to account for constructive contempts,
because it has rarely happened that
respectable public journal welding any
considerable influence has deliberately
employed outlaw methods in attempt
ing TO control judicial action.
Cases of this kind originating in the
lower courts are very numerous. We
will not take the time to cite them or
any of them. But as was said by the
Supreme Court of Iowa in the case Of
Field against Thornel. 100 Iowa, page
Is. il seldom happens that an honora-
BILE journalist so far forgetS his sell
respect as to trespass upon the rights
of the judiciary, or to seek to control
OF improperly influence it's conclusions.
We have. of course no desire to re-
strain in the slightest degree the free
dom of the press, or to maintain the |
dignity of the court by infiicting penal |
ties on those who may assail US with |
and malicious publications |
Our decisions and all our official &C |
lions are public property. and the press |
and people have the undoubted right |
to comment on them, and criticize them |
and censure them as they see fit. Ju- |
dicial officers, like other pubic ser /
wants must answer for their ofhclai !
actions before the chancery of public /
opinion; they must make good their I
claims to popular esteem by excellence |
and by virtue, by faithful and efficient
service. and by righteous conduct Bt'
while we concede to the press the
right to criticize freely our decisions |
when made, we deny TO any individual
Dr to any class of men right to sub
ject US TO any form of coercion with
the view of affecting our judgment in
A pending case. In the Iowa case
= hove cited IL is said: Courts are con-
stantIy passing on questions affecting
the life and liberty of the citizen as
well as the rights of property, and the
freedom OF the judiciary to investigate
and decide is quite as important to the
we'll being of society as the freedom of
the press Men" said one who knew
them we'll. ARE flesh and blood, and
approaheusive." Few stand unmoved
BY the clamor OF the multitude Va