New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-07-01
NEwsPAPERs AND THE COURTS.
See opposite page for subscription rate

The decision Of Judge Pritchard, of the United
States Circuit Court, in a case involving the
right Of newspapers TO criticise judicial proceed
ings is Of scarcely greater interest journalists
than 10 the general public. The Editor of The
Raleigh News and Observer refused TO pay
fine Of $1,000 imposed upon him by district
Judge and committed 10 Jail. The question
of the authority Of the court so TO fine and COM
nit him having come up for review on a writ
of habeas corpus. the judgment of the lower
court has been declared void and without effect
by Judge Pritehard, who says in the course of
his opinion:
That newspapers sometimes engage in unWar-
ranted criticism OF the courts cannot be denied
In some instances they constrUe the liberty of
the press as license to authorize them to en-
gage In wholesale abuse Of the court, but these
instances are rare and do warrant q de-
parture from the well settled principles OF the
law as declared by Congress and construed by
the courts. If judges charged with the admins
tration OF the law not 10 be criticised on
OF their official conduct. the liberty OF the
press is abridged and the rights of individuals
are imperilled
1t cannot be fairly disputed, think, that
the instances in which newspapers abuse their
privilege Of criticising courts of justice
rare. 1t is an important and gratifying fact
that the general respect in which the courts are
held by the people Of this country is uniformly
reflected by the press. Even editors whose
sense OF responsibility Is hol IllSl diiu MuOSS
journalistic practices are discreditable seldom
indulge in vituperative utterances concerning
judges, while newspapers OF the most respecta-
bic character often hesitate 10 visit censure
upon them even when they feel that il is de
served Such reticence IS certainly preferable
10 the other extreme, but restraint can be car
ried too far When the great evil of the laws
delays for example, for which commissions of
the bench and bar appear unable 10 find an
effectual remedy, Is encouraged by the court
itself-when judge permits attorneys 10 be dis
orderly and irrelevant, promotes instead of him
dering dilatory tactics and otherwise degrades
the processes OF justice-it is desirable that
he should be decorously but firmly reproached
for SO unworthy a surrender Of his authority
and so mischievous a contribution 10 the re-
sources OF injustice. Similarly, when judge
unnindfuI Of the limitations Of his Office, pre-
sumes TO usurp the functions Of the jury and
10 hold il up 10 scOrn and contempt for having
rendered 2 verdict which he disapproves, it
may be a plain duty 10 point out the miscon-
ception under which he is laboring
There are other cases, for which the records
might be cited in which frank condemnation of
judicial methods is fully warranted If not alb
solutely demanded nor do We think that there
IS serious danger of liberty's passing into
license from q more general exercise or the
privilege which Judge Pritchard defends.
There may be-" as he said. instances where
athe notification OF editorials or other matter
sfn newspapers would bring the author within
..the limitations of the statute" Indeed, that
would seem TO be a singularly moderate state
rnent Of the proposition. 1t can hardly be
doubted that published utterances against a
court which would be generally regarded as
improper and designed 10 serve no good pur-
nose would be found 10 be actionable. Ii may
not be easy TO draw line IN advance, but it is
n fact that the real transgressors are few, and
we believe that a rule which jealousy protects
the freedom Of the press is more likely to en-