The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-07-01

Asheyille, n. c., June 29.-Judge j. c.
Pritchard of the United States Circuit
court. at noon today, filed his opinion
in the celebrated case of Josephus DAN
iels, before him on a writ of habeas
corpus, charged with contempt of court.
Mr.. Daniels, who is editor of The Ra-
! leigh News and Observer, had been
fined $1,000 for contempt OF D'strfct
Judge Purnell.
Judge Pritchard's opinion will be
recognized as important legal record,
and is a careful and comprehensive re-
view of the law as applied to newspa-
per utterances- that might be construed
as contempt of court. The text Of the
decision in part as as follows:
United States of America, Eastern
District of North Carolina, in the Cir
cult Court. Ia Equity.-At Raleigh.
John p. Cuyler, in behalf of himself
and other stockholders of the Attain
tic and North Carolina Railroad
Company,
The Atlantic and North Carolina Rail-
road Company.
In re. Josephus Daniels. for Contempt.
Pritchard. Circuit Judge:
In order to determine whether the
petitioner is entitled the relief pray
ed for in the petition upon which the
writ of habeas corpus was issued, Il
is necessary to determine two ques-
tions:
% Did the court which imposed the
sentence in this case have jurisdiction:
(2) Does this court have jurisdiction to
hear and determine this case on writ
of habeas corpus?
The section under which the court
based its action is 725 of the Revised
Statutes, which reads as follows:
The said court shall~have power to
impose and administer all necessary
oaths; and to punish, by fine or impris-
onment, at the discretion of the court
contemPts of their authority: Provided,
That such power to punish -contempts
shall not be continued to extend to
any cases except the misbehavior of
any person in their presence, or so near
thereto as to obStruct the administra-
ton of justice. the misbehavior Of any
of the officers of said courts in their
official transactions, and the disobe-
dience or resistance by any such officer,
or by any party, juror, witness, or other
person, to any lawful writ, process
order, rule, decree, or command of the
said courts"
This act not only limits the power OF
the court, but employs language which
clearly defines the power of the courts
with respect to suzuhary punishment
for contempts ana applies to all courts
except perhaps~1he Supreme court. II
applies to the District and Circuit
courts, IN as much as they were Great
ed by act of Congress; their powers
anCt duties being granted by the act
creating them and subsequent acts en-
iarging and diminishing their jurisdic-
ton. The act of 1881 Is a chart by
which these courts are to be guided
IN cases where summary punishment
Tor contempt is to be inflicted.
LAS thus seen the power of thess
courts in the punishment Of contempts
can only be exercised to insure order
and decorun in their presence, to Sc
cure faithfulness on the part of thefl
officers in their official transactions
and to enforce obedience to their law
full orders, judgments and processes
Kent's Commentaries. volume 1, note
on page $40, at bottom. it Is said, n
speaking of the act of 1881:
That act had withdrawn from tn.
,sourts of the United States the com
mon law power to protect their suffers
officers, witnesses, and themselves
against the lfbels of the press, however
atrocious, and though published and