The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-06-30

COURT HAD NOT POWER
Judge Pritchard in His Opinion De-
cIares That the Court Exceeded
Authority Granted in 1881
and the Judgment
Was Void.
Especial to News and observer.)


Asheville, N, c., July 3O.-Judge
Prichard today handed down his opin-
ion in the famous Josephus Daniels
contempt case. which was heard in
Raleigh three weeks ago. The opin-
ion in full is as follows:
United States of America, Eastern
District of North Carolina, in the
Circuit Court. In Equity-At Raj
eigh.
John p Cuyler, in behalf of himself
and other stockholders OF the At
lantic and North Carolina Railroad
Company.
VS..
The Atlantic and North Carolina Rail-
road Company.
In re, Josephus Daniels, for con-
tempt. Pritchard, Circuit Judge:
In order to determine whether the
petitioner is entitled to the relief pray
ed for in the petition upon which the
writ of habeas corpus was issued, 1T
is necessary to determine two ques-
tions:
I'D Did the court which imposed
the sentence in this case have juris-
diction; CD Does this court have jul
risdiction to hear and determine this
case on a writ of habeas corpus?
The section under which the court
:
Statutes, which reads as follows:
'The said court shall have power to
Impose anl ad-z5rsister f4Il ilf.eCsSsll, -
uaIhS. and to punish, by nne or inn
priSonment, at the discretion of the
court, contempts of their authority;
Provided. That such power 20 punish
cogtempts shall not be construed To
extend to any cases except the misbe-
haVior of anY person in their pres
ence. or so near thereto as to obstruct
the administration of justice, the mis-
behavior of any of the officers of said
court in their official transactions and
the disobedience or resistance by any
such officer, or by any party. juror,
witness. or other person. to any law
full 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 summary pun
ishment for contempts and applies to
all courts, except perhaps the supreme
Court. 1t applies to the Circuit ana
District courts, inasmuch as they were
created by act of Congress pow
ers and duties being granted by the
act creating them and subsequent acts
enlarging and diminishing their JuflS-
diction, The act of 1881 is chart
by which these courts are TO be guided
in cases where summary punishment
for contempt is to be inflicted.
Justice Fields, in eX Parte Robin
son. 10 Wall. at page So in referring
to the act of 1881, says:
1T limits the power of these courts.
i'm this respect, to three classes of
cases 1st, where there has been mis-
behavior of a person in the presence
of the courts, or so near thereto as TO
obstruct the administration of justice;
In
ior of any officer of the courts in his
official transactions; and 3rd, where
there has been disobedience or re-
sistance by any officer party, juror,
Witness or other person, to any lawful
writ, process, order, rule. decree, or
command of the courts.
"As thus seen the power of these
courts in the punishment of contempts
can only be exercised to insure order
and decorum in their presence, to Sc
cure faithfuIness on the part Of their
officers in their official transactions,
and to enforce obedience to their law
full orders, judgments and processes.
Kent's Commentaries, Volume /, note
on page $40, at bottom, it is said, in
speaking of the act of 1881:
"That act had withdrawn from the
courts of the United States the COM
mon law power TO protect their suit
ors, officers, witnesses and themselves,
against the libels of the press, how
ever atrocious, and though published
and circulated pending the very trial
of the cause.
In the case of Savin. 131 u. S., page
274, Justice Harlan, among other
things saws: "The act OF
1889. did not define what were the
contempts of the authority of the
courts of the United States, in any
cause or hearing before them, nod Gid
it prescribe any special procedure for
determining q matter of contempt.
Under that statute the question
whether particular acts constituted
contempt as well as the mode of pro-
| ceeding against the offender, was left
to be determined, according to such
established rules and principles of the
common law as were applicable to our
situation The act of 1881. however.
materially modified that of 1888. in
that it restricted the power of the
court to inflict summary punishment
for contempt to certain specified
cases, among which was misbehavior
i'm the presence of the court or mis-
behavior so near thereto as to OBJ
struct the administration of justice"
In Eek Parte Poulson, Volume 10,
Fed. Cas-, No. 1850, on page 1906,
Baldwin, Judge, says: "On March End.
1881, a Stat. 4S7), Congress passed
an act declaratory of the law con-
cerning contempt of court.
The history of this act. the time of
its passage, its title and provisions,
Continued on Page Four)