The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-06-06
sUpeeAe COURTS OPINION

Tae Supreme Court yesterday hled z
a-esxfou In The case OF waiter -
s-fth. editor OF The ADVERTISE. ~ne
va srntsnesd TO thirty days imprison-
meat by the Circuit Court for contempt
~ court. in publishing a cartoon o.
Jufrw Gear. TIE ease hla 49,
br,u<ht before the Supreme Court on
h.s~as corpus proceedings. the main
p.,snt being that the act committed vas
n,t ia the presence % the court. 80 that
AZ eontsrnpt had been committed at all.
AZ 80 s-constructiVe contempt which
n. Hawaiian statute is not punishable,
ADD consequently that the Circuit Court
fhaf no Jurisdiction 10 sentence Mr.
Ssrsith.
The decision Of a majority OF the
court. By Judges F'rsar and Caioraith.
npnolds the decision OF the Circuit
Court. while Judge P~rry fiIes n strong
dissenting opinion
zach OF the Judges has written an
opinion OF hls own The decision OF
Jad<rs GaIbralth IL that the contempt
committed ~as a direct contempt. The
d~ef.ion OF judge Frear 10 somewhat
obscure In lts reasoning and meaning.
A. far al = brief study thereof tndi-
Gates. ne holds that under Hawaiian
statute the Supreme Court cannot on
hab-as corpus procccdlnGs. which are
Of q collateral nature. inquire into the
ns--frs OF she case n. states. n effect.
that 10 th>-~ proceedings had come be-
fore the Supreme Court ON appeal or
~r4t of error. a. t. allowed BY the stat
ute- OF some OF the states. but - not
allowed under Hawaiian iav. the result
might have been different As IL ~. he
f-e4s bound BY the tschnicaiities OF the
situation. and declines TO 20 into the
merits OF the question. holding that the
Circuit Court had jurisdiction.
Judge Perry holds. In a strongly rca-
soned and logical decision. that the
pubtIshinR Of t-~ cartoon was not a
direct contempt. and IL. II anything. a
constructive contempt. which by Ha-
waiian statute II not punishable.
The difference between direct and
Constructive" contempt Is that a d.
rect contempt IL one committed In the
presence or immediate vicinity % the
court A constructive contempt IL an
act not committed in the presence OF
the court. such. for example. as news
per Articles :nmentinG upon. or
cartoons relating To the court.
The reasoning In Judge Gaibraith's
decision n. "a ne understand u. that
any Newspaper commenting upon the
decislon OF a court In a manner dis
t3%ArAul 10 the OF tn1t court. II
liable TO BE- punished for contempt. not
wfthstandinFs that there ~ an existing
statute prohibiting the punishment Of
contempt.
The decision OF Judge Perry is a d.
rect negntive OF the reasoning OF Judge
Issfbraith and denies that the courts
have any such power.
The decision Of Judge Frear. while Il
IN effect supports that OF Judge Gal
3rsith. does not so as far. and whether
q supports TO the fun the theories ad-
'anced by Judge Gaibraith are left an
pen question:
The attorneys for AfF. Smith. Msssrs
". ~. Smith and 4. Lewis. Jr.. and I
-orrtn Andrews. believe that a Fed I
raj question IL involved. In that Con-
Irczs. having ratified. among other
tatutrs. the Hawaiian statute prohfb- I
ling the punishment OF constructive
outempt." that statute IL now aa much :
FEDERAL statute as though IL had been Z
ssscd by Congress In the first In "
tancc. II this contention u correct
gives Jurisdiction 90 the Federal :
ourts TO consider whether 0r not the q
Ct committed IL. In effect. a direct or
constructive contempt. With a view {
. securing Federal adjudication on .
MA potnt. the question will BE- inirnedi- '
tefy brought before United States Dis :
riet Judge Ester. on a writ OF habcas
orpu- u