The San Francisco call., 1904-07-29
DISARMING THE COURTS.

UDGE PRITCHARD of North Carolina has Just
decided, and properly, that judge on the bench,
~ like any other public officer, Is properly SUBJECT to
criticism by the press and that such criticism is not to
be construed into contempt of court
Contempt of court soundly construed consists IN
acts of disorder in the presence of the court in the
violation of the courts order decree 1he attempt to
90 farther and consrue criticism of judge by
per into contempt of his has made Roadway in
this country and will not. Judicial officers must de-
pend for the preservation of their regulations upon the
public opinion that dominates the good name OF all
and all public officers. There reckless and icen
newspapers which the power OF publicity VI
cousy corrupty No how bad their character
how low their motives will believe their slam
ders and translate their ibels into public service But
such believers are themselves qualified to make pub
lie opinion and its leaders so, after all, the
Ecentious press like all things licenous dsarms itself
by being outawed from the ympathes OF the only part
of the community that has character and therefore in
huence.
Closely allied to this matter of the relations of the
bench and the press however, is form of discussion
that carried into politics in 1890, and is kept there
by the Democratic platform of this year 1t IS propo
stion disarm American courts by taking away from
them the power to protect property by injunction OF
course all thinking men see that this policy falls upon
the owners of property and upon the courts Yet
the public has been partially wrought to tolerate the
proposition by the newspaper discussion of the
for exercising of their planest judicial powers
which existed before had been given the power
and great judges devised the form of writ
rights of person and property the influence of much
Of the newspaper discussion Of the subject would be
limited So sacred the rights of property finally
considered, as the common law developed, that
the in which they held the beginning of
that system of equity which protects property
rights in the face of legal conclusions. Since the
long contest between law and equity in England led
side by Coke and the other by Elesmere from
which Coke retired defeated the courts have used the
injunction give relief property rights in where
legal remedy existed where it is inadequate.
Though the writ is junior that of habeas corpus it
has equal dignity The habeas corpus is the efficient
and sole defense of personal rights in their need and
tremity and the injunction performs the Office for
property rights. But when injunction issues the
enforces it through its power punish for
tempt 1t has other instrumenality, other
pom The Federal court, by permanent injunction pro-
tected the property rights of people the Feather,
Yuba and>Sacramento rivers against injurious hydraulic
mining. If the cannot punish violators for
tempt of court that permanent injunction is vain thing
and the valley rancher have protection at all If
guilty OF contempt of for violating. njunc-
ton issued property is TO be taken of the
hands of the and tried for contempt by jury it
is the end of system of equity jurisprudence 1t will
that when the law furnishes adequate remedy,
adequate protection, there protection ALL for
the disarmed and equity is destroyed.
This is subject that the press afford discuss
without heat prejudice That the proposition is toll
Grated all is evidence of the spread of the Sociastc
idea that property robbery and therefore enti-
tied protection. 1t is the beginning of the battle be-
tween Socialism and the law. In the result is involved
the fate of all property rights and therefore of property
itself 1t is dsqueting that OF the leading political
parties should go deliberately record in what calls
its conservative and safe FORM in favor of such
a monstrous proposition. It the radical and the
most dangerous attack property, because its object
is veiled by making it attack the courts