The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-05-19
Judge Anderson Sentenced w. w.
Watts and David A. Sachs to Sixty
Days Imprisonment.
HABEAs CORPUS PROCEEDINGS
THEY WE'RE INSTITUTED IN BEHALF
OF THE ATTORNEYS.
Chief Justice Fuller Holds that Con-
spiracy Was Not EstabIfshed-Re-
Iafionsbfp of Courts.

Chief Justice Fuller, or the United states
Supreme Court at Washington, yesterday
ordered the permanent release of the two
Louisville attorneys. w. W. Watts and
David A. Sachs. who were committed to
Jail in Indianapolis last February on the
charge of contempt of court in connection
with the bankruptcy proceedings against
NJ. Zier & Co., of New Albany. The two
attorneys were charged by Judge Ander-
son. of the Federal District Court, with
obstructing by advice his orders for the
transfer of the property of the bankrupt
firm from the custody of the State court
to the Federal Court, and ordered their
Incarceration in jail for sixty days.
The trouble arose through a conflict of
receivers for the Zer plant. One of these
receivers was appointed by Judge Ander-
son, of the Federal Court, and the other
was afterward appointed by Judge Utz. of
the Floyd Circuit Court 1t was also
claimed that Judge Utz appointed a re-
ceiver. Charles Kelso, by advice of w. w.
Watts and David A. Sachs. and as a con-
sequence there was general raid down in
the southern part of Indiana and the north
ern part of Kentucky for those who had
seemingly disobeyed the mandate of the
Federal Court.
Judge Anderson heard testimony and was
convinced that Sachs and Watts were at
the bottom, and. after sending the watch
man for the Zier plant. the sheriff and
deputy sheriff of Floyd county and the
Floyd county receiver TO the Marion county
jail, he sentenced Watts and Sachs for
sixty days imprisonment
:. HABEAS CORPUS.
They had been imprisoned only a short
time when they were released through
habeas corpus proceedings brought by W.
II. II. Miller. Mr.. Miller went to Wash
ington, where he pleaded the case before
the United States Supreme Court, with the
result given above.
Chief Justice Fuller, In reviewing the case.
said that the charge by the Federal Court
amounted to a charge OF conspiracy
between the attorneys and the state
court. and that such charge
he said, that the order made by the State
court was made alone upon the motion or
the court itself.
Chief Justice Fuller reviewed the cir
cumstances leading up to the sentence of
Messrs Watts and Sachs. who entertained
the conviction In good faith that the Gus
tody OF that court could not be lawfully
interfered with by the Bankruptcy Court
by summary proceedings.
Their view was" said he, that the
jurisdiction OF the State Court having at
tached TO that court was in all circum-
stances entitled to exercise ii until yoIun-
tarily surrendered" He thought. however,
the surrender OF the property to the Bank
ruptcy Court.
INDEPENDENCE OF THE BAR.
Taking up the question of the imprison-
ment OF the attorneys because of advice
they had given, the chief justice said:
I'm the ordinary case of advice to clients.
II an attorney acts in good faith and in
the honest belief that his advice is we'll
founded and in the just interest of his
client. he cannot be held lawfully for error
in judgment The preservation of the in
dependence OF the bar is too vital to the
administration of justice TO allow of the
Referring to the charge OF conspiracy be-
tween the attorneys and the court, he
said: I'VE are of opinion that such charges
ought never be indulged in. and that the
ultimate consequences of attacks of such
character by the courts Of one govern
ment on & the courts .S OF another are too seri-
dence Is there that these attorneys or either
of them gave any advice or took any action
:n bad faith, not In the honest discharge of
their duty as counsel but with fhe daI;her
ate intent TO have the federal government
set at defiance and its orders treated with
contempt? State courts are entitled In the
assistance OF the gentlemen of the har I'm
the maintenance of their dignity and iuris-
diction ana the fearless discharge OF their
duty by the latter should not be shaken by
liability to punishment for mere errors of
Judgment I'm rendering such assistance We
cannot but express our regret at the nm
fortunate collision between the two courts
and our hope Is that its termination will
leave no bitterness behind. We are of
orinion that there legal evidence
~ sustain these convictions for contempt
and the order in each case must be- pc
fItioner discharged"
Judge Anderson read with intense inter-
est the dispatch from Washington showing
that Watts and Sachs had been released
While reading the dispatch he remarked
that he failed to where he did not have
jurisdiction in the case but when asked for
an expression he merely said
II have had my say in the case. and do
not care 10 say anything regarding Chief
Justice Fuller's ruling"
w. III. II. Miller, who secured the release
OF Watts and Sachs. refused TO make any
statement regarding the decision.