Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-12

1 iCooloho at CNSis dCN VI SC I'LL
I II it become the courts clear duty
check the habit by the severe les
on of punishment for contempt.
The single insulting expression for
! 7hich the court punsnes NAV there
ore seem to those knowing nothing of
he prior conduct of the attorney. ana
| looking only at the single remark, a
natter which might we'll be unnotic-
| ed; and yet if all the conduct of the
attorney was known. the duty of in
| reference and punis- ment might be
clear
We remark finally, that while from
he very nature of things the power
| of court to punish for contempt is
a vast power, and one which. in the
hands of a corrupt or unworthy judge
! may be used tyrannically and unjust
ly, yet protection to individuals lies
in the publicity of all judicial pro-
ceeL ngs, and the appeal which may
, be made to the legislature for pro-
proceedings against any judge who
proves himself unworthy of the power
! intrusted to him."
Where a contention arose between
! counsel as to whether a witness had
not already answered a certain oues-
/ ton. and the court after hearing the
! reporters notes read, decided that
she had answered it. whereupon one
of the attorneys sprang to his feet.
and. turning to the court. sad, in a
loud tone aud insulting manner:
She has not answered the question"
held that the attorney was guilty of
! contempt regardless of the question
whether the decision CT e court was
right or wrong" Russell V. Circuit
Judge. 81 Iowa. 1902.
In Sears V Starbrd - Cal. 81.
Am. St 1l3. a brief rejecting upon
the trial judge vas stricken from the
record in the Supreme Court, because
= it contained the following:
The court, out o. fullness of his
love for a cause, the parrias 10 it OF
their counsel or from an overzealous
desire to adiudicate all matters. points
arguments and things could not, witt
= any degvee of prOpriety under the law
patch and doctor up the cause of the
plain, ifs, whic-., perhaps, the care
lessness Of their counsel hau left il
such condition as to entitle them t.
no relief whatever
In reference to this language it wa
said in the opinion;
"lere is a ---s,nct intimation tia
l the Judge of ,--e court below did no
: act from proper motives, but from
j love of the parties or their counse,
D We see nothing ia he record whic
e suggests that such was the case. O.
t the contrary, e action complained C
e seems to us to have been entlrel,
r proper: See Sll V. Reese. A Cal. 34t
e The brief. therefore contains groun
e less Cargo against the purity Of me
!. tive Of the Judge OF the court below
: This we regard as a grave breach c
( professional propriety. Every perso
a on his admission to the bar takes a
5 oath to faithfully discharge the DIT
d ties of an attorney ani cnuncelcr-
e Surely sucn a course as was taken i
t this case is not in compliance W
Il that duty In Friedlander v. Sumne
d G. & S. M. Co., 81 cal III. The coul
s. said:
: IF unfortunately counsel in an,
II case shall ever so far forget h:msc
= as willfully to employ language man
d testify disrespectful to the judge OF tn
>. superior court-a thing not to be al
f ticipated-we shall deem it our dut
, to treat such conduct as a contempt {
o this court, and to proceed ACCORDING
q ly; and the briefs of the case ver
3. order ed to be stricken from the fi;es
In U. 5. v. Late Corporation O
II Church of Jesus Chtis. Of Later Ia
e Saints. language used in the petite
l. filed in effect accusing the court {
d an attempt to shield it's receiver an
il his attorneys from an investigated
n of charges of gross misconduct in o
/, fee and containing the statement thu
IA I'VE must decline to assume tn
il functions of a grand jury. or atteml
> to perform the duty of the court
e investigating the conduct of it's OF
q. GERS, was held to be contemptuou
211 P. 5lY.
~ In re Terry, IS Fed 4ls an extreu
# case, for charging the court with ha
e ing oeen briben. resisting remers
IS from the court room by the marsh
d acting under an order from the benc
is and using abusive language, one
4. the defendants was sent to Jail II
r. thirty days and the other for
,e months. Judge -erry. who had n
A. made any accusation against I'll
o court sought release and to be pur
il ed of the contempt by a sworn p:tl
n ion in which he alleged that in II
he transaction he did not have the sligf
1t est idea Of showing any disrespect
o. the court. 1t was held that this cou
e. not avail or relieve him and it VI
is said:
H. "The law imputes an intent to
s. complish the natural result OF one
ne acts, and. when those acts are OF
le criminal nature. it will not acceE
,r against such implication the denial
h. the transgressor. No one would
1e safe if denial or a wrongful or Grin
#, ! nal intent would sufhce to realese I
Of / violator from the punishment due
it. his offenses."
n In an application for writ of b
ey beas corpus growing out of that ca
u! Justice Harlan, speaking for the
lis preme court of the United States sal
is I'VE have seen that it is settle
Sc doctrine in the Jurisprudence both
he England and of this country. new
or suposed to be in conflict with the 1