The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1904-07-07
LIBERTY OF The PRESS

Press is Rare-PunishapIe Soh1eHlP'
Is Defined.
Asheville, N. c., special.-Judge ]. C.
Pritchard, of the United States Circuit
Court, has filed his opinion in the case
Of Mr.. Josephus Daniels, editor OF the
Releigh News and Observer, who had
been fined $4,000 for contempt OF court
BY District Judge Thomas R. Purnell.
The case came up on a writ OF habeas
corpus sued out by Mr.. Daniels, who
refused to pay the fine and was ordered
committed.
Judge Pritchard's opinion Is careful
and comprehensive review Of the law as
applied to newspaper utterances that
might be construed as contempt OF
court. The opinion says that in order
to determine whether the petitioner Is
entitled to the relief prayed for in his
writ 1t Is necessary to determine two
questions: % Did the court which i'm
posed the sentence in his case have
jurisdiction and (2) Does this court
have Jurisdiction to hear and determine
this case on writ of habeas corpus?
"The force of public opinion in this
country in favor Of the freedom OF the
press has restrained the free exercise
of the power to punish this class OF
contempts, and in many jurisdictions
statutes have been enacted depriving
the court Of the power to punish them.
It was taken from the Federal courts
BY the act of Congress Of 1881, which
act deprives these courts Of the COM
mon-law power to protect by this pro-
cess their suitors, witnesses, officers
and themselves against the libel of the
press, though published and circulated
during the trial of a case therein.
"The newspapers sometimes engage
in unwarrantable criticism Of the
courts cannot be denied" continues the
Judge. I'm some instances they con-
strue the liberty Of the press as IL
cense to authorize them to engage In
wholesale abuse Of the court, but these
Instances are rare and do not warrant
a departure from the well-settled prin-
ciples of the law as declared by Con-
gress and construed by the courts. II
Judges charged with the administra-
ton of the law are not to be criticised
on account of their own conduct the
liberty Of the press is aSidged and
the rights of individuals imperiled.
There may be instances where the
publication Of editorials or other mat
ter in newspapers would bring the au-
thor within the limitations Of the stat
ute. For instance, If newspaper
should publish an article concerning
trial which was being considered by a
Jury and should send copy OF the
paper containing such article to the
Jury or a member thereof during the
progress of the trial for the purpose OF
influencing them in their decision, 1t
would present question whether such
conduct would not be misbehavior In
the presence Of the court or so near
thereto as to obstruct the administra-
tion of justice.
1T appears that the distinguished
Judge who adjudged the petitioner to
be in contempt Of court" he concludes,
exceeded the authority granted In the
act Of 1881 and that the Court was
without Jurisdiction. Such being the
case, the judgment of the court is void
and therefore nullity.
I'm view Of the foregoing, the Court
fir ds that the petitioner is unlawfully
restrained of his liberty, and it is there
fore considered and ordered by the
court that the said Josephus Daniels
be. discharged from the custody Of the
Marshal of the United States and that
he go hence without day."