The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-06-21


court and for which they had been
summoned. One thing will surely be
admitted by their attorney-that The
News and Observer, before, during and
after the contempt proceeding inaugu-
rated by Judge Purnell, at least did
not itself fall into or encourage 81
lence. The equation between a man
ready to go to Jail for the sake of
speaking his mind and one who sut-
fers silently is one not readily solved
by the lay mind.
With respect to what was said of
the two unfortunate victims to the In
discretion of having been caught, it
is proper to repeat here what 1T was
intended to brin~ out with clearness in
the editorial referred to that this pa
per has no animus, no desire to hound
down or to prosecute them. In what
was conceived to be a spirit of kindli-
ness and warning, 1t was merely point
ed out that they had been guilty of
two separate and distinct offenses and
that punishment had so far been adj
smaller of these. 1t was suggested
exactly as Judge Womack suggests it
but with different application-tha
the law tries man on the testimony
and it was distinctly stated that if
Messrs Rogers and Sorrell assumed
to bear the brunt of the whole matter,
they must naturally expect that the
law would consider them greater GRIM
inals than they in reality were. That,
as We understand it, is one of the
stern necessities of the criminal Code
and Judicial Judgment that a man
should have a trial on the facts and
that the judge should punish with
severity or otherwise as the importance
Of the crime and the aggravation or
ameioration of the surrounding cir
cumstances seem to warrant In sug-
costing this to the defendants i'm the
embracery case, it was intended mere
ly to indicate to them the seriousness
Of their position and to prevail on
them for their own sakes and the sake
of the larger justice in Wake county
to get upon the stand and testify un-
der oath as to the motives which
prompted them to act as they did. In
taking this position we were aware of
course of the fact that MeSsrs. Rogers
and Sorrell were not admitting that
they had been sent on their errands
to jurymen. The circumstances, how
ever 10 a lay mind not perhaps as
altruistically confiding as it might or
even ought to be, left us in the position
of doubling that lack of confession as
an act affirmative of independent ac-
ton. But the acts which they have
been found by Judge Moore to have
committed constitute a crime of
sort SO wide-reaching and of such gen.
eral concern, that it was felt that they
should be made to see clearly their re-
the public. s,.
AS to the other comparison by Judge
Womack-we do not think them inten-
tionally odious-that The News and
Observer was in the attitude of in
fuencing or attempting to influence
jury DIS the Iiotu ucliC' VIC
beg to explain that the remarks re-
ferred to had peculiar application as
to what the defendants might expect
in the way of punishment from the
Judge after conviction by the jury.
The facts having been found with so
much clearness by Judge Moore, we
may be pardoned for pre-supposing
conviction on those facts which have
not been denied. Surely Judge Wo-
mack will not place himself in the at
titude of saying that this or any other
paper would have influence in pre-
judicing the mind of Judge Moore, for
instance, in passing sentence on men
convicted in his court! To US, the fact
that the judge had sent the order
binding over the defendants for the
additional crime was significant of the
fact that he at least considered that
they had not been sufficiently punished
according to their own showing.
Unable to believe that such activity
could arise from men out of friend
ship to strangers as that exhibited by
the respondents, The News and OBJ
server, with a lively sense that they
were paying debts due in great part
Din thert aceounts3& merely suggested
III stii5ISifidness and lsyiripjatfy that theS
-ot CTR ho Mt