Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-01
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
STATE OF NEVADA
In the matter of Alfred Chartz, Esq,
for Contempt

for Contempt
DECISION
Respondent was commanded to
show cause whw he should not be
adjudged guilty of contempt for hav-
ing, as an attorney of record in the
matter of the application of Peter Kair
for a Writ of iabeas Corpus fled il
this court a petition for rehearing IL
which he made use OF the following
statement:
''In my opinion, the decisions favor
ing the power of the State to limit the
hours of labor, on the ground of the
police power of the State are al
wrong. and written by men who have
never performed manual labor, or 0v
politicians and for politics. They 10
not know what they wrote about"
Respondent appeared IN response to
the citation, filed a brief and made an
extended address to the Court in
which he took the position that the
words in question were not contempt
icus; disavOwed any intention to COM
nit a contempt of court; and. further
that if the Language was by the court
u.--med to be Objectionable. he apoll-
eileG fcl It's 'sse and asked rat the
& @ hn e,ric5.en rom The petition.
IN considering the foregOins state
ment it is proper to note that IN the
briefs filed by Respondent upon the
hearing of the case in the first n
stance. he used language OF similar
import which this court did not take
cognizance of, attributing its use 10
over Zealousness upon the part OF
counsel. but which was of such M
ture that the Attorney General in his
reply brief referred to as insinuat-
ing that the Legislature in enacting
and this court in sustaining the law
were being "impelled or controlled by
some mythical political influence "
fear. which exists only in the pyr0-
technic imiginatiOn of cunsel.'
Also, the case and its condition At
the time the objectionable Language
was used. should be taken into cOnsid-
Grafton. The proceeding, in which
this petition was filed, had been
brought to test the )nstitutiOnaiity
OF section of an Act of the Legisia-
ture limiting labor to eight hours per
day in smelters and other ore reduc-
ton works, except in cases OF emeT-
gency where life or property Is IN
imminant danger. Sta. 1903, p. 80.
This Act had passed the Legislature
almost unanimously and had receiv-
ed the Governors approval. At the
time of filing the petition, respond NJ
was aware that the court haf nrp
vlously sustained the validity of tn :
enactment as limiting the hours If
labor in underground mines, Re
Boyce, q New. 1927, IS P. l., 65 L. R.
A. Al, and in mills for the reduction
of ores, Re Kair % New. so P. Asa
and that similar statutes had been up
held by the Supreme Court of Utar
and the Supreme Court of the United
States in the cases Of State V. Holden
II Utah II and Sc. As P. 757 and 1105
81 l.. r. A. 103 and 10S; Holden V
Hardy 1863 L. S. 366, IS Sup. Ct. 1888
Short V. Mining Company 20 Utah, 20
81 p. 100 - l.. 2. A. sos and by thu
Supreme Court of the State of Mis-
souri, re Cantwell, l19 Mo. 245, Is $
W. 500. 1t may not be out of place
here, also to note that the latter case
has since been affirmed by the s
preme Court Of the United States, an,
more recently the latter tribunal, al
herring to its opinion therein and il
the Utah cases. has refused to inter
fere with the decisions of this Co.
in re kair.
1t would seem therefore, a natura
and proper, if not a necessary de
Guction from the language in question
WIEN taken in connection with thu
law of the cases as enurciated b.
this and other courts, that counsel
finding that the opinion of the highes
court in the and was adverse insted
Of favorable 10 his contentious. in tina
it specifically affirmed the Utah de
cision in Holden VS.. Hardy. which
sustained the statute from which our
is copied, and that all the courts nan
ed were adverse to tie views he ad
vocated. had resCrted TO abuse of tn
Justices of this and other courts. an
to imputao.ons of their motives.
The language quoted is tantamOun
to the charge that this tribuNal on
the Supreme Courts of Utah, Nilsson
and OF the United States and the Jli
tees thereof who participated in tn
opinions upholding statutes limitin
the hours CT labor in mines, Smelter
and other ore reduction works. Wer
misguided by ignorance or base pol
l.cal, considerations.
Taking the most charitable view
if counsel became so imbued and ml
guided by his own ideas and conc''
sions that he honestly and erODeousl
conceived that we were controlled b
ignorance or sinister motives lnStea
Of by law and justice IN determinin
constitutional or other questions. an
that these other courts and judge
and the members of the legislator
and Governor were guilty of the acc
sation he made because they and v
failed to follow the theories he a
vocated, and that his opinions Dug
70 outweigh and turn the scale again
the decisions Of the four courts nal
ed including the highest in the la1
with nineteen justices concurrln
nevertheless it was entirely inapp1
pirate to make the stat oment in brit
If he really believed or knew
facts to sustain the charge he ma
he ought to have been aware that t
g l. dor ant n