Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-28

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 vilification
He may Iully present, discuss and
argue the evidence and the law and
freely indicate wherein he belle IS
that decisions and rulings are wrong or
erroneous, but this he may do with
out effectually making bald accusa-
tons 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-
soning 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 = 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 ear 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. 1t is also
provided by statute. BY analogy we
note the adjudications and penalties
imposed in 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 committee from that body. after
an Investigation, reported that in their
opinion his ''claim to be DISCHARGED
from imprisonment by reason of privi-
le9de 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 rri-
yately handed TO the judge a letter.
couched in respectful language, in
which they stated. substantially. that
their client feared, from the circur-
stances of the former trial, that the
Judge .Idu COHctlN6u d 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 cCnsd-
err whether he should not reIinouish
the duty of presiding at the trial to
some other judge, at the same time
declaring that no personal disrespect
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 a fine of $3.50 each,
and pUAlically reprimanded the 9th
ers. the junior counsel, at the time ex-
pressing the opinion that if such
thing had been zone 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 he'd been taken in furtherance of
what they deemed . vi.dl interests
Of t-eir client and the faithful and
conscientious discharge Of ther duty
The judge accepted the disclaimer of
personal disrespect, but refused to
believe the disclaimer of intention to
commit a contempt and enforced the
fines. II Albany Law Journal 4Os,
rs Am. R. TSP.
For sending to a district Judge ont
of court a letter stauing that The
ruling you have made is directly con-
tTary to every principal of law, and
/ every body hnOwS !, | believe and it
is our desire that no such decision
shall stand unreyersed in any court.
We practice in" an attorney was fneu
$50 and suspended from practIce until
the amount should be paid. In de-
livering the opinion of the Supreme
Court of Kansas in Re Prior, Is Kan
y. 26 Am. 747. Brewer j.. said:
Upon this we remark, in lie first
place that the language of this letter
/ is very insulting To say to a Judge
that a certain rui-ng which he has
made is contrary to every principle OF
law and that everybody n0ws if. is
certainly most severe imputation
We remark. secondly. that an attor-
ney is Under special obligations to be
considerate and respectful in MS CON
duct and communications TO a Judge
4 Iit - Stli plllCtl " me court ana IT Is
/ therefore his duty to uphold its honor
and dignity. The independence of the
profession carries with it the right
freely to challenge. criticise and CON
denim all matters and THINGS under re
view and in evidence. But with this
. privilege goes the corresponding obi
! cation Of constant courtesy and res
+ pect toward the tribunal in which the
proceedings are pending. And the
fact that the tribunal is an inferior
one, and its rulings rot final and with
ont appeal, does not diminish in the
slightest degree this obligation of
courtesy and respect. A justice of
the peace before whom the most trif-
ling matter is being litigated is en-
titled to receive from every attorney
| IN the case corteous and respectful
treatment. A failure to extend this
courtesy and respectful treatment is
3 failure of duJy: and If NAV hp 81