The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1902-03-14
HUMPHREYS FINDS SMITH
GUILTY OF CONTEMPT


nhrf is nui stronger naw fhhn H tYtt
aus hHfnff Dnnfts ore charged Win
fhp solemn, sltftd aud high Function
~ administering Justice ana % 10 their
uutb. not unlN Co. EiNp 90 every sultuf
bic dpmaudallo flrht but Co glNc him
asFufanco that mo- banned and hostile
influence shall Operate against him
Will, bis cause b. under consideration
before thp court and before the jury
4 lIraut Del entitled not only to lust
decision. but to a decision altogether
free from coercion ur suspicion uf Coz
cryiUU. Nothing elise viii satisfy him.
nothing less can nll the measure 81 his
expectations. lie has no standard with
which Go gauge judicial nrmnoss. and
10 the court has been exposed 10 innu-
ences calculated. as 600 the Mccarthy
case. to tell against him. he viii not
know whether an adverse decision H.
The voice " the law or the cry ~
oOWardly and brutal editor
our views upon this matter are well
expressed in the following excerpt from
the opinion Of Judge Lawrence In the
People against Wilson. 60 Illinois.
page 1876. "A court will. Of course. en-
ueaVor To remain wholly uninfucnced
and unprecedented by publications like
that under consideration, but viii the
community believe that it was able to
do SO? can IL even BE- certain in re-
gard To itself? Can men always b.
certain Of their mental poise? 4 timid
man might be influenced to yield. while
n combative man would be driven in
the opposite direction. While the ac-
tual Influences are on one side or the
other. 50 far as 1t is felt at all, it
becomes dangerous To the administra-
ton of justice. Even IL a court Is
happily composed of men of mature
years and of such firm and equal tenn
per that they remain wholly uninflu-
enced In either direction, nevertheless,
"A disturbing influence has been thrown
into the counsel chamber, which 1t is
the wise policy Of the law to exclude"
Equally pertinent are the remarks OF
Judge Elliott, in People ex rel. Conner
vs.. Stapleton. is Colorado. Sos. Judges
are human; they are possessed of hui
man feelings. ana when accusations
are publicly made as by a newspaper
article charging them directly or indi-
rectly with dishonOrable conduct in a
case pending before them and about
to be determined, IL Is idle to say that
they need not be embarrassed in their
consideration and determination OF
such cause. They will inevitably suffer
more or less embarrassment in the
discharge of their duties according to
the nature of the charges and the
source from which such charges en-
anate. When a judge tries and deter
mines "A cause in connection with
which public charges against his judi
cial integrity have been published. the
public as well as parties interested are
frequently led by the publication OF
the charges to distTust the honesty
and impartiality of the decision, and
/ thus confidence in the administration
of justice is impaired 1t is not only
important that the trial of causes shall
net fFaI hat IL. Toll
of the courts shall be just, but it is
| important that causes shall be tried
and judgments rendered without bias.
without prejudice or improper influence
of any kind. 1t Is not merely a private
wrong against the rights of litigants
and against the rights of judges. IL is
a public wrong, a crime against the
! State, against the decency and good
order of society. That a party does not
! succeed in such undertaking which he
/ manifestly intends lessons his offense
! only in degree. His ability to do harm
/ is confined. ii is limited by the known
/ personal weaknesses of the writer Of
/ such articles, and the contempt into
which they generally bring him. We
feel quite sure that the publications
/ here in question have not in the least
deferred us from discharging with
! fidelity our duty in the case at bar.
/ They were manifestly intended to over
/ awe and intimidate this court. they
| appearing to be pat forth for the pur-
pose Of preventing a decision by the
/ jury i'm favor of the defendant. They
were under the circumstances palpable
/ acts of journalistic lawlessness anG
anarchy, calculated to weaken the in
! dependence of the court and to destroy
| confidence in it's judgment. To justify
! them Is to deny the supremacy, of the
| law, and to answer the doctrine OF
newspaper absolutism under the guise
of free press. To admit that publish
! ers may promote their interests In
pending litigation by resorting to meth
DDS not available to others. is to strike
down our much Wanted principle of
equality before the law" and to de-
| clare that journalists who choose to
become malefactors are a privileged
class, and entitled as such to go UNI
whipped Of justice. But the law rec
| ogniZes no such distinction: il never
has recognized it. 1T accords to pub
fishers, says Chancellor Wallworth. nc
rights bur such as are common to all
1 They have just the same rights as the
rest Of the community have; no more
and no less. A man who speaks in a
newspaper has no greater right than
he who speaks out of II. A newspaper
is no sanctuary behind which a per-
son can shield himself for breaking the
solemn laws of the land. We have not
acted in this case out of any spirit OF
resentment; indeed, we have no reason
to feel specially aggrieved. The natural
tendency Of the article is, however, and
the cartoon is to interfere with and
obstruct the due administration of JUS
tiCc of this court.
Ii is the unanimous opinion of the
judges of this court that the defendant
should be held guilty as charged in the
complaint herein.
Mr.. w. O. Smith, in answer to tn,
remarks of the court, said that there
was no necessity for n further showing
on the part of the respondent, that {
sworn return had been made in which
personal knowledge was disclaimed
and that the cartoon related to TIT
first trial, case in which the decision
had already been given.
Judge Gear replied that the contemp
was not constructive one, and tina
that statute did not apply to writer
or spoken words, and consequently tn