Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-10

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
STATE OF NEVADA
In the matter Of Alfred chartz, Esq,
for Contempt
DECISION
Respondent was commanded ID
show cause whw he should not be
adjudged guilty of contempt for hay-
ing. as an attorney of record in the
matter of the application of Peter Kair
for Writ OF FabeaS Corpus filed in
this court a petition for rehearing il
which he made Use of the following
statement:
I'm 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
:rong, and written by men who have
never performed manual labor, or oy
politicians and for politics. They 10
not know what they wrote about
Respondent appeared in response to
the citation, filed a brieI and made an
extended address to the Court IN
which he took the position that the
words in question were not contempt
ious: disavcwo = ~ intention to COM
nit a contempt of court; and. further
that if the Language was by the court
deemed to be objectionable. he apCll-
.;zeG fcl its use and asked that the
sa~e be stricken from the petition.
In considering the foregoins state
ment it is proper to note that in the
briefs filed by Respondent upon the
IF ha fret
stance, he used language of similar
import which this court did not take
cognizance of, attributing its ~3e TO
ever zealousness upon the part OF
counsel. but which was of such NJ
ture that the Attorney General in his
reply brief referred to as insinuat-
ing that the Legislature in enactipg
and this court in sustaining the law
were being "impelled or controlled by
some mythical political influence ,r
fear, which exists only in the pyro-
technic Imagination of cnnsel'
Also. the case and its condition at
the time the Objectionable Language
was used should be taken into consid
GRAFTON. The proceeding, in viii I'll
Us petition was filed, had been
brought to test the >nstitutionality
of section of an Act of the Legisla-
ture limiting labor to eight hours per
day in smelters and other ore reduc-
ton works, except in cases of emer-
gency where life or property is in
imminant danger Stat 1908. D. So
This Act had passed the Legislature
almost unanimously and had receiv-
ed the Governors approval. At the
time of filing the petition, respond n
was aware that the court haH I'VE
vlously sustained the validity of tn :
enactment as limiting the hours #
labor in underground mines, Re
Boyce, 81 New. 327, Is P. l., IS L. R.
A. A., and in mills for the reduction
of ores, Re Kair % New. 80 P. 46i
and that similar statutes had been up
held by the Supreme Court Of Utah
and the Supreme Court of the Unite1
states in the cases of State v. Holden
II Utah II and Sc, 46 P 757 and 1105
81 L. R. A. 1O3 and 1903; Holden v
Hardy 169 U. S. 1866. Is Sup. Ct. 3S3
Short v. Mining Con, oany. 90 Utah, 20
81 P. 72O, As l.. r e. sos. and hv the
Supreme. Court of the State Of Mis-
souri, re Cantwell, l19 Mo. 245, Is $
". 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 ant
more recently the latter tribunal, al
herring to its opinion therein and i,
the Utah cases. has refused to inter
fere with the decisions of this Coz
in re Kair
1t would seem therefore, a natura
and proper, if not a necessary de
Guction from the language in question
when taken in connection with thu
law Of the cases as .enunc;ated b,
this and other cohfts. that coprsel
finding that the opinion of the higffes
court III the land Was adverse fnstes'
IF favorable TO his contentious. in tina
it specifically affirmed the Utah de
cisiGn, in Holden vs. Hardy. which
sustained the statute from Which Our
is copied. End that all the courts nam
ed were adverse to tie views he I'D
vocated. had resorted to abuse Of tn
Justices of this and other courts. AM
to imputa Ions of their motives
The language quoted is tantamcun
tn the charge that this tribu~rl Az
the Supreme Courts Of Utah MissC,l'
and of the United States and ,Ae M
opinions unfolding statutes limitin'
the hours Of labor in mines, smelter
and other ore reduction works. wer
misguided by ignorance or base poll
teal considerations.
Taking the most rcharit a bic view
II counsel became. So iinbued and nil
guided by his bvn ideas and conclr
sions that he honestly and eroneoasi
ignorance or sinister motives instea
of bv law and justice in determinin
constitutional or other questions. an
that these other cousts and fudge
and the members Of the 'egislatrr
and Governor were guilty Of the acct
sation he made because they and y
failed to follow the theories he a.
yocsted, and that his opinions ougf
n outweigh and turn the scale again
the decisions Of the four courts nar
e1 including the highest In the Ian