The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1904-07-06
RIGHTS CT TIE PRESS.
Judge Pritcnard Orders Release Of
Editor Daniels from Custody.

Judge Pritcnard Orders Release Of
Editor Daniels from Custody.
A dispatch from AsheVille, n. c.,
SAYS Judge Jeter c. Pritchard Of the
United States circuit court at noon
Wednesday filed his opinion in the Gel
ebrated case OF Josephus Daniels, be-
fore him on writ Of habeaS corpus,
charged with contempt OF court. Mr..
Daniels, who is editor OF the Raleigh
News and Observer, had been fined
50, 900 for contempt Of District Judge
Purnell.
Judge Pritcnards opinion will be
recognized as an important legal re-
cord, and is a careful and comprehen-
sive review Of the law as applied to
newspaper utterances that might be
construed as contempt Of court. The
text Of the decision in part is as fol-
lows:
In re Jcsephus Daniels for contempt
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, it Is
necessary to determine two questions:
II. Did the court which imposed
the sentence in this case have jurisdic
tion?
g. Does this court have Jurisdiction
to hear and determine this case on a
writ Of habeas corpus?
's* \ y The force Of public opinion
in this country in favor CT the freedom
of the press has restrained the free ex-
ereise of the power to punish this class
# contempts, and in many jurjsdic-
tions statutes have been enacted de-
priying the court Of the power to pun
ish this class OF contempts, and in
many jurisdictions statutes have been
enacted depriving the court Of the pow
er to punish them. 1t was taken from
the federal C. urts by the act OF con-
gress Of 1881, which act deprives those
courts Of the common law power to
protect by this proce S their suitors,
witnesses, officers and themselves
against the libel of the press, though
published and circulated pending the
trial of a cause therein.
THAT newspapers sometimes en-
gage in unwarranted criticism of the
courts cannot be denied. In some in
stances they construe the liberty OF
the press as license to authorize
them to engage in wholesale abuse OF
the court, but these instances are rare
and do not warrant departure from
the well settled principles OF the law
as declared by congress and construct
ed by the courts. II judges charged
with the administration of the law are
not to be criticised on account Of their
official conduct the liberty Of the press
is abridged and the rights Of indisid.
uals ipperiled.
There may be instances whe-e the
publication of editorials or other mat
ter in newspapers would bring the au-
thor within the limitations Of the
statute. For instance, if newspaper
should publish an article concerning a
trial which wss being considered by
jury, and should send copy of the
paper containing such article to the
Jury or member thereof, during the
progress Of the trial, for the purpose Of
influencing item in their decision, it
would present question whether
such conduct would not be misbeha-
vior in the presence OF the court, or SO
Lear thereto as to obstruct the ad-
miniStration Of justice.
It appears that the distinguished
Judge who adjudged the petitioner to
De in contempt Of court exceeded the
authority granted in the act OF 1881,
and that the court was wsthout juris-
diction. Such being the case the
judgment Of the court is void and
therefore a nullity.
In view Of the foregoing the court
finds that petitioner is unlawful'y re.
strained Of his liberty and it is there.
fore considered and ordered by the
court that the said Josephus Daniels
be discharged from tie custody OF the
marshal of the United States and that
be 20 hence without de'ay.''