Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-28
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
STATE OF NEVADA
In the matter of Alfred Chartz, Esq,
for Contempt
DECISION

In the matter Of Alfred chartz, Esq,
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 Habeas Corpus filed in
this court 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 all
Wrong, 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 brief and made an
extended address tc the Court in
which he took the position that the
words in question We're not contempt
ious; disaVo'. % - intention to con-
nit a contempt of court; and. further
that if the Language was by the court
deemed to be Objectionable. he apoil-
gihed fol its use end asked that the
same 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
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 20
over zealOusness upon the part OF
counsel but which was OF such n
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 "iInI elled or controlled by
some mythical political influence ,r
fear, which exists only in the pyro-
technic Imagination Of Guns al."
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 - onstitutionality
of a section of Act of the Legisla-
ture limiting labor to eight hours per
day in smelters and other ore reduc-
lloii "olhS, ChNCpI III SdSCS VI SIuSi-
gency where life or property is in
imminant danger. Stat. 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 had pre-
viously sustained the validity Of tn s
enactment as limiting the hours Il
labor in underground mines, Re
Boyce, q New. 327, Is P. l., 65 L. R.
A. AZ, and in mills for the reduction
of es, Re Kair % New. 80 P. 46i,
and that similar statutes had been up
held by the Supreme Court of Titan
and the Supreme Court Of the United
States in the cases CT State V. Holden,
Il Utah II and Sc, As P 757 and 11o5,
81 L. R. A. 103 and los: Holden V
Hardy 169 U. S. 366. IS Sup. CT. 1888,
Short V. Mining Company, 70 Utah, 20,
81 P. 100. As l. r A 602 and nv the
Supreme Court of the State of Mis-
souri, re Cantwell, ll9 Mo. 245, 70 s.
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, and
more recently the latter tribunal, al
herring to its opinion therein and in
the Utah cases has refused to inter
fere with the decisions OF this Coz.
in re Kair
1T would seem therefore, a natural
and proper, if not a necessary de-
duction from the language in question
when taken in connection with the
law Of the cases as enunciated by
this and other courts, that counsel
finding that the opinion of the highest
court in the land was adverse instead
of favorable to his contentious. in that
it specifically affirmed the Utah. de-
cision in Holden VS.. Hardy. which
sustained the statute from which ours
is copied. and that all the courts NAM
ed were adverse to tie views he adj
yocated. had resCrted to abuse Of the
Justices Of this and other courts, and
TO imputa Ions nf their motives.
The language quoted is tantameunt
to the Charge that this tribunal and
the Supreme Courts of Utah. Missouri
and of the United States and tle Jus
tees thereof who participated in tire
opinions unfolding statutes limiting
the hours Of labor in mines, smelters
and other ere reduction works. were
misguided by lgnO ance CT base poll
ucal considerations.
Tallirg the most charitable view.
if counsel became so imb,.c2 and mis-
guided by his own IDEAS and conclu-
sions that he honestly and eroneously
conceived that we were controlled by
ignorance or sinister motives instead
of by law and Justice in determining
constitutional or other questions, and
that these other courts and judges
and the members of the legislature
and Governor were guilty Of the accu
sation he made because they and we
failed to follow the theories he ad
vocated, and that his opinionst ought
to outweigh and turn the scale against
the decisions Of the four courts nam
e1 including the highest in the land
with nineteen justices concurring
neyerthele.l - was entirely inappro
pirate to make the statement in brief
-o7s 4 III