The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-07-23
SUPREME COURT
FINES TWO EDITORS
FOR CONTEMPT,
Continued From Page One.

yoked herein.
I'll That said complaint and information
and the proceedings had and proposed
hereunder are all in violation Of section
l OF the fourteenth amendment to the Con-
stitution OF the United States, which Is
specially invoked herein, together with all
the rights and privileges guaranteed there
under
'12 That section 1916 of the Revised Stat
utes of Missouri for 1899 provides: Section
1916 may punish contempt Every court OF
record shall have power to punish, as for a
criminal contempt. persons guilty of any OF
the following acts, and no other:
First. Disorderly, contemptuouS or In
solent behavior. committed during its sit
ting, in immediate view and presence, and
directly tending to interrupt its proceed
tngs, or to impair the respect due to its
authority.
Second. Any breach Of the peace. noise
or other disturbance. directly tending to
interrupt its proceedings.
"'Willful disobedience of any process or
order, lawfully issued or made by 1t.
Fourth. Resistance willfully offered by
any person to the lawful order or process
OF the court
Fifth. The contumacious and unlawful
refusal Of any person to be sworn as a
witness, or, when sworn, the like refusal to
answer any legal and proper interrogatory-
And this respondent states that. by virtue
of said statute. this court Is not authorized
to punish this respondent on account OF any
of the matters charged in the information
herein.
Wherefore he asks that this complaint
be dismissed
Mr.. New argued the points as set out
above in the return. especially emphasizing
the points that the writ was irreSularly Is
sued because no affidavit was fled In sup
port of the petition, and because the de-
PENDANT did not know that the case was
still pending, a motion for reheaHng having
been filed, but not acted upon.
CROW PRESENTS
CASE OF THE STATE.
Attorney General Crow appeared for the
State and held that he had right to bring
such a proceeding, and that Vt was not
necessary for him as Attorney General. the
sworn officer of the State in legal matters.
to support the petition with an affidavit.
The argument on the points involved occu-
pied the better part of two hours, and the
case was submitted. when the court took
recess to O. clock in the afternoon.
The court resumed the bench. and Chief
Justice Robinson announced that the court
had selected Judge Marshall to write the
opinion. which would be handed down later
IN typewriter form, and that Judge Mar
shall was ready then to announce the points
In the opinion and the judgment
Judge Marshall then announced the judg-
ment and the points involved orally
The opinion holds that 1t was not neces-
sary for Attorney General Crow to swear
to the Information. as he was the legal and
sworn attorney for the State. That the
court has power to punish for contempt
whenever committed, either direct or con-
structiye, and that the court can punish
whether the case is yet pending in court on
a motion for rehearing, at any time
thereafter IL 1t so chooses. The true ground
for punishment Is the act of the citizen who
ia in contempt OF court. II any one OF the
court IS guilty OF the charge made in the
nevspaper article then there Is ample OPP
portunty 10 punish the individual member
of the court but not the court Itself. The
cour. holds that under the Constitution free
speech is granted and The liberty Of the
press. but that In the case at bar t was an
nb,,sa of tho press, and not the freedom OF
the press. which was concerned.
The citizens ~ Warrensburg. hearing OF
the decision in the case. wired Mr.. Shepherd
Tn draw on the Citizens Bank Of Warrens-
burg for all the money needed. The amount
was then paid and the defendants released.
THROWS HIMSELF
ON MERCY OF COURT
Editor Cundifr was adjudged guilty Of
contempt because he reproduced in his pa
per, the Sedalia Capital, what Mr.. Shepard
had produced editorially In his paper at
Warrensburg. Mr., Cundif in his return
which follows. made n statement of fact
and did not attempt to fight the case and
for that reason his fine was the minimum.
Having no attorney and finding that It
was necessary to file written return. Mr..
Cundift was assisted by Attorney General
Crow. and the following return. which was
an amended one. in respect to the last para
graph was filed with the court:
ITO the Honorable Supreme Court OF the
State of Observation-Disclosures: In answer to
your citation of July Is. would represent,
respectfully. that the article complained OF
was republished in the Sedalia Daily Capt.
tai from the Warensburg Standard Herald
and was duly credited to that paper.
THE case reviewed by the article in ques-
ton was one Of interest In Sedalia, where