The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-11-13
Voice of
the People
Another View.

Yoder's case Will likely raise some very
I interesting fundan0 sr-al questions that
have not yet been passed upon by the
/ Court of Appeals. The State government
Is the creature OK the Constitutional Con-
vention. II created three coordinate
/ branches-the legislative, the 5ldicial and
the executive. Each has rs own sphere.
Neither has any inherent right TO do
anything, and can only exercise such
7 powers within its sphere as the COnsti-
tuition permits 10y special grant. or fails
TO prohibit The Judiciary is IN no sense
I superior to the others as its powers arc
derived from the same source and it's
limitations are defined by the same rules
OF construction as obtain IN the other
cases. In the absence Of constitutional
restrictions. Z may exercise. under the
common law. such powers carry out the
/ necessary 10 effectively carry ont the
purpose of its creation. but when tho
/ Constitution speaks. the common law
must remain silent. and the Judiciary
must confne It's acts TO those things
! within the constitutional lnitat ons. or
/ become itself a violator OF the INV.
me Virginia Constitution. section 81.
says. THE General Assembly may regu-
/ late the exercise by courts OF the right
I 10 punish FOR contempt"
II goes further IN the schedule. and
| provides IN section /: THE common law
/ and the statute laws IN force at the time
( this Constitution goes into effect so far
I thereby shall remain IN force until they
expire by their own limitation or are
altered or repealed by the General AS
/ sembly"
The General Assembly. acting under tho
] specific and general authority OF thu
/ ConstitUt on. cited above. during the scs-
4 sion OF 1914, passed the present statu,e
7 Regulating the exercise Of the court s.
right TO punish for contempt 80 case
involving the present constitutional pro-
ssh an q
authority has been brought before the
Court Of Appeals for adjudication.
Admitting. was held in Carter's
case. that the General Assembly. Of Itself
had no power to limit the common law
right OF the Judiciary 70 punish FOR con-
tempt. foder's case comes under a dif-
terert section OF the Constitution.
which expressly empowers the Cen
eral Assembly 20 place such limita-
tons uDon the courts right 70
exercise this power. The Constitution
having empowered the General Assembly
20 regulate the matter. the scope Of the
courts authority must be found ln the
statute.
The common law onalns only 20 the
extent that the General Assembly does
not substitute statute law therefor. To
deny the power of the Constitutional Con-
Nentlon 70 provide "a method for changing
~ anolshing the common law would hoe
way by which "a free people might frame
a government 10 suit themselves. l doubt
u any wei informed lawyer would under
take TO sustain such a proposition.
In Carriers case. the opinion hung en-
urely upon the courts right to punish
contempt under the common law nut the
court I'm a remarkably clear and pointed
way. pointed out the true relation OF Tie
judiciary 10 the other branches OF gov
eminent. and susta ned FULLY the power
of the people through the Constitution TO
Limit and define tine spheres OF each.
Carter's case. ss Va. SOC the eourt says.
THE power 10 punish for contenpts is
inherent in the courts and is conferred
upon them by the Constitution by tho
very act Of their creation. 70 is trust
connded ana duty imposed upon w bv
the sovereign people. which we cannot
surrender or suffer 10 be impaired with
out being recreant to our duty"
I'm the same opinion, page SO. the court
says, I'm our system OF government AN
power and authority are derived from
the people They ha % seen III by organic
law 20 distr butte the power of government.
among three great coordinate depart
ments-thc executive, the legislative and
the judicial The Constitution Of III.
Sate, which is the law To- all. declares iu
the seventh section OF the first article
that "tie legislative. executive and judi
cial powers should DC separate and dis
tiuct"
This is a quotation from the BIZ %,
Rights. an instrument which should never
ne mentioned save with the reverence
due 20 the great charters Of our liberties
~ such Importance is this principle
deemed that II is repeated. and const-
tutes a distinct article. which declares
that the legislative. executive and judi
ciary departments shall be separate and
dis inct. so that neither exercise the
powers properly belonging 10 either of
the others nor shall any person exer-
else the power OF more than one Of them
at the same time. except as hereinafter
prov ded. Constitution OF Virginia, Ar
ticle Il
Whoever. therefore, belongs 70 either
one OF these great departments is an
agent and servant OF common master.
and each and all represent a part Of the
sovereignty OF the State. long as they
move within the appropriate spheres pre-
scribcd TO them by thu organic law"
Burdett's case l03 Virginia. Is sfrnpi,y
a reaflrmation OF Carriers case and the
court. page SIS says Such being tina
common law applicable to the case. The.
courts Of Virginia are bound 10 admits
ter II until 1t has been changed by com
petent authority"
This competent authority having
changed IL. there is no longer In the Vir-
einia courts the power under the common
law 20 punish for contempt They must
now rely upon and be limited by the
/ provisions of the statute
/ In Joseph Fulton VS.. the state Corpo-
ration Commission OF Virginia rendered
august IT, 1906. the court held. The
legislative department acknowle lies no
superiors except the Federal ana State