Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-27

court in ascertaining the truth per-
tanning to the pertinent facts, the real
effect of decisions and the law appli-
cable in the case, and he far oversteps
the bounds of professional conduct
when he reports to Misrepresentation,
false charges or viiification.
He may GULLY present, discuss and
argue the evidence and the law and
freely indicate wherein he benz IS
that decisions and rulings are wrong or
erroneous. but this he may do with
out effectually making bald accusa-
lions against the motives and intelli-
gence of the court, or being discour-
teous or resOrting to abuse which is
not argument nor convincing to rea-
so1ing minds. If respondent has no
respect for the justices, he ought to
have enough regard for his position
at the bar to refrain from attaching
the tribunal of which he is a mem
Der, and which the people, through
the Constitution and by general con-
sent have made the final interpreter
of the laws which ne, as an officer
of the court, has sworn to uphold
and protect.
These duties are so plain that any
departure from them by a member
OF the oar would seem to be willful
and intentional misconduct
The power of courts to punish for
contempt and to maintain dignity in
their proceedings is inherent and is
as old as courts are old. It is also
provided by statute. By analogy we
note the adjudications and penalties
imposed in a few of the many cases.
ord COttingham imprisoned Ed
mund Lechmere Charlton a barrister
and member of the House of Com
mons for sending a scandalous letter
TO one of the masters Of the court,
and q committee from that body. after
an Investigation, reported that in their
opinion his "ciaim to be discharged
from Imprisonment by reason of privi-
legde of parliament ought not to be
admitted" Milne and Craig, BIT.
When the case of People VS.. Tweed
in New York came up a second time
before the same Judge, before the trial
commenced, the prisoners counsel pri-
vately handed TO the Judge q letter,
cOuched in respectful language, in
which they stated. substantially, that
their client feared. from the circum-
stances Of the former trial, that the
Judge had conceived a prejudice
against him. and that his mind was
not in the unbiased condition neces-
sary to afford an impartial trial. and
respectfully requested him to cGnsid-
er whether he should not relinGuish
the duty of presiding at the trial to
some other Judge, at the sane time
declaring that no personal dlsresDect
was intended toward the Judge of the
court The Judge retained the letter
and went on with the trial. At the
end Of the trial e sentenced three
of the writer's to fine of $3.50 each,
and pUblicaliy reprimanded the 9th
ers, the junior counsel. at the time ex-
pressing the opinion that if such a
thing had been uone by them in Eng
land. they would have been expelled
from the bar within one hour The
counsel at the time protested that
/ they intended no CONTEMPT OF
court and that they felt and
! intended to express no disres.
pect for the Judge but that their &C
! ton had been taken in furtherance OF
what they deemed 3 wal interests
/ of cir client and the faithful and
J conscientious discharge Of the duty
The judge accepted the disclaimer of
personal disrespect, but refused to
/ believe the disclaimer of intention to
commit contempt and enforced the
| fines. II Albany Law Journal 4Os
1 rs Am. r. 752.
| For sending to a district Judge out
of court letter stating that The
ruling you have made is directly con
| trary to every principal of law, and
every body nnows :, l believe. and il
is our desire that no such decision
shall stand unreversed in any court
We practice in" an attorney was fineu
$50 and suspended from practlce unit
the amount should be paid In de-
livering the opinion of the Supreme
Court of Kansas in Re Prior, 10 Kan
70 26 Am. TAT, Brewer J.. said:
Upon this We remark, in he frs
place that the language of this letter
is very insulting. To say to judge
that a certain ruling which he has
made is contrary to every principle o
law and that everybody -nows it. is
certainly most severe imputation
We remark. secondly. that an attor
ney is under special obligations to b.
cOnSiderate and respectful in mis- con
duct and communications to a Judge
He is ar officer of the court. and ii il
therefore his duty to uphold its honor
and dignity. The independence of tn
profession carries with it the righ
freely to challenge. criticise and con
denim all matters and things under re
view and in evidence. But with thi
privilege goes the corresponding obi
cation of constant courtesy and res
pect toward the tribunal in which tn
proceedings are pending. And thu
fact that the tribunal is an inferior
one, and its rulings not final and with
out appeal. does not diminish in tn
slightest degree this obligation OF
courtesy and respect A justice o
the peace before whom the most trit
ling matter is being litigated is er
titled to receive from every attorne
in the case corteous and respectfu
treatment. A failure to extend thi
courtesy and respectful treatment i
, failure of duty; and it may be S