The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-03-02
EvEN-HANDED ENFORCEMENT OF



Federal courts have given a number of
lessons in recent years of the danger of
violating their orders. thereby mourning the
penalty of contempt of court, but the one
just given by the United States District
Court in this city stands alone in its sig
nificance. Most Of the other cases have
grown out of violation of orders of the
court by striking miners. The strikers
have violated orders of the court in ignor-
ance of the law or in spirit of bravado
and defiance, and some of them have been
sent to Jail for it. This has been construed
by labor leaders as an attempt to intimi-
date and Cypress workingmen, as if any
man fit to be United States judge would
entertain such motive as that.
The case which has just occurred in this
city differs from any other in that the per-
sons cited for contempt were acting by
the advice of lawyers and under the orders
of state court which undertook to as
sumo jurisdiction of a case of which the
United States Court had already taken
jurisdiction. In fact, the judge of the local
court, the circuit judge of Floyd county,
was one Of the persons cited for contempt
His contempt was in appointing receiver
for an insplvent company after a receiver
in bankruptcy had been appointed by the
United States Court, and the offense of the
others consisted in trying to take control
of the property out of the hands of persons
acting under the authority of the United
States Court. For this offense the federal
judge sentenced six persons, all well-known
citizens of New Albany, to Imprisonment
from ten to sixty days in the Marion coun-
ty jail. The sentences were as follows:
Charles d. Kelso, the receiver appointed
by the state court, sixty days: Michael
| Zier, of the firm of NJ. Zier & Co. and po-
| lice commissioner of New Albany, thirty
/ days; Raymond j. Morris. sheriff of Floyd
county, twenty days; Claude Sittason, dep
| uty sheriff. Thomas Smithwick and Fred
Ruoff, watchmen, ten days each. George
| B. Mcintyre. circuit prosecutor of Floyd
county, is charged with contempt in hav-
! ing fled the information against the tenn
| porary receiver appointed by the United
States Court, and he is cited to answer to-
A
| gave legal advice in the premises, have
given bond for their appearance on March
8 TO answer and show cause why they
| should not be punished for contempt. In
addition to suffering terms of Imprisonment,
| the defendants above named will have to
! pay the costs of the court and the expenses
of their transportation to and from In
dianapolis. The punishment seems severe
but 1t was such clear case of contempt
| by trying override an order of the United
States Court that it was necessary fol-
| the court to take notice of it and make an
example of those who had engaged in it,
All of the defendants good citizens and
| are far from being lawbreakers in the
ordinary sense of the term, but they made
a serious mistake in supposing that an or
der or decree of a federal court in case
clearly within it's jurisdiction could be
violated with impunity, even under con.
| travening order by a local court. 1t was
for contempt because they are well known
and popular citizens in the community
where they live If the court had ignored
their offense or let them off without pun.
ishment, striking miners who have beer
punished for contempt those who may
be punished hereafter could have said
Yes, the United States courts make fish Of
one and flesh of another; if poor miner
violates an order of the court he is hauled
up for contempt and sent to Jail, but prom
inent citizens and men with money in theil
pockets can do it with impunty. Bench
law is for poor men only" There would
have been some ground for this sort o.
criticism if the United States Court haf
ignored this fragrant case of defying it.
authority. The incident has an unpleas
ant aspect in the Imprisonment, though
brief. of several good citizens, but it is
lesson in the even-handed enforcement o.
| law.