Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1904-07-06
LIBERTY OF THE PRESS
He says that Abuse of Liberty Of the
Press is Rare--Punlshable Contempt
le Defined.

te Defined.
Asheville, N. c., Special.-Judge ]. G..
Pritchard, of the United States Circuit
Court, has filed his opinion in the case
oa Mr.. Josephus Daniels, editor Of the
Releigh News and Observer, who had
been fined $4,000 for contempt of court
by District Judge Themas R. Purneil.
The case camo up on writ Of habeas
cerpus sued out by Mr. Daniels, who
refused to pay the fine and was ordered
committed
Judge Prltchard's opinion is a careful
and comprehensive review Of the law as
applied to newspaper utterances that
might be construed as contempt iof
court. The opinion says that in order
to determine whether the petitioner is
ertitled to the relief prayed for in his
writ it is necessary to determine two
auestionss ~ Did the court which i'm
yosed the sentence in his case have
jurisdiction and (2) Does this court
have Jurisdiction to hear and determine
this case on a writ of habeas corpus?
1.-THE force of public opinion in this
country in favor of the freedom of the
press has restrained the free exercise
of the power. to punish this class Of
contempts, and in many jurisdictions
statutes have been enacted depriving
the court of the power to punish them.
It was taken from the Federal courts
by the act of Congress of 1881, which
act deprives these courts Of the conf
mon-law power to protect by this pro-
cess their suitors, witnesses, officers
and themselves against the libel of the
press, though published and circulated
during the trial of case therein.
"The newspapers sometimes engage
in unwarrantable criticism of the
courts cannot be Denied" continues the
Judge. an some instances they con-
strue the liberty of the press. as a Ii
cense to authorize them to engage in
wholesale abuse of the court, but these
instances are rare and do not warrant
a departure from the well-settled prin-
ciples Of the law as declared by Con-
gcess and construed by the courts. II
judges charged with the administra-
ton Of the law are not to be criticised
on account of their own conduct the
liberty OF The press is abridged and
the rights of individuals imperiled.
"There may be instances where the
publication Of editorials or other mat
ter in newspapers would bring the all-
thor within the LIMITATIONS ofsthe stat.
ute. For instance, If q newspaper
should publish an article concerning, q
trial which was being considered by q
jury and Should send "a copy of53the
paper cntaInlng such EaTti ito the
Jury oramembsrt during the
progress OF sfhes trial forstRe purpose 2ofs
Influencing them in, st heir decision, 1t
would present question whether such
conduct would not be mlsbehaVlor IN
the presence Of the court or SO near
thereto as to obstruct the administra-
tion Of justice.
"It appears that the distinguished
Judge who adjudged the petitioner to
be in contempt of court" he concludes,
exceeded the authority granted in the
act of 1881 and that the Court was
without jurisdiction. Such being the
case, the judgment Of the court is void
and therefore nullity.
'In view of the foregoing, the Court
finds that the petitioner is unlawfully
restrained Of his liberty, and it is there
fore considered and ordered by the
court that the said Josephus Daniels
be, discharged from the custody of the
Marshal of the United States and that
he go hence without day"