Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-14


ressiens- at every adverse ruling ~un-
al it become the courts clear <luly
O. check the habit, By the severe les
on of a punishment for contempt
The single insulting expression fer
hich the court punisnes may there
ore seem to these knowing nothing Of
he prior conduct of the attorney. ano
looking only at the single remark, a
after which might well be unnotic-
ed; and yet if all the conduct of the
lttcrney was known, the duty of in
difference and puniS- ment might be.
clear a-
We remark finally, that while from
he very nature of things the power
Of a court to punish for contempt is
vast power. and one which. in the
hands OF a corrupt Or unworthy judge
nay be used tyrannicallv and unjust
~, YET protection to individuals lies
n the publicity of all judicial pro-
cee,, ngs, and the appeal which may
he made to the legislature for pro.
proceedings against any Judge who
proves himself unworthy CT the power
intrusted to him"
Where a contention arose between
counsel as to whether witness had
net already answered certain ques-
ION. and TIE court after hearing the
raporter's notes read, decided that
she had answered it, whereunon one
Of TIE attorneys sprang TO his feet,
rnd turning to the court, sal, il
loud tone and insulting manner
She has not answered the question
held that the attornev was guilty OF
contempt regard ess. Of the question
vaesher the decision of coHrt y"
right or wrong" Russell Y. Circuit
JUDGE s. Iowa. 100.
Ii Sears Y. Starblrd. Il Cal 81. 7
Am. ST. 1k3, b -iaf rejecting un0n
the trial judge was stricken from the
record in the Supreme Court, because
il contained the following:
THE court, cur O. q fuilnese Of his
love for a cause. the patEias 10 It or
their counsel, or from an overzealous
desire 70 adjudicate all matters. points
arguments and things could not. with
any degree of propriety under the law.
patch and doctor up the cause Of the
plain ifs. whic, perhaps, the care
lessness CT their counsel had left il
such condition as to entitle enem r
no relief whatever"
In reference to this language ii was
said in the opinion:
= ere is net il tin- alton that
the nudge Of e court DelCw did ne
act from proper motives. but ION 2
love Of the parties cr their counsel
We see nothing IL lie record yHici
suggests that such was the case. Or
the contrary. e action complained o.
seems to us 10 have been enrTalv
proper: See Sll V Reese. Il Cal. $40
The brief. therefore contains grorn
less Carge. against the purity of nc
tive Of the Judge c the court below
This We regard as 2 grave breach OF
professional propriaty. Every person
On his admission to the bar takes ar
cath to faithfully discharge the du
ties of an attorney AMI cnincelcr
Surely Sue a course as was taken II
this case is not in compliance "
that duty In Friedlander V. Sumnel
G.. L s. M Co, 81 ii. III. The cou~
said:
If unfortunately counsel in any
case shall ever ST far forget h:.nst-
as willfully TO employ language mani
festly disrespectful to the Judge CT tn
supe. ior court-a thing not to be an
ticipated-we shall deem it cur cur
to treat such conduct as contempt 0
this court. and to proceed according
ly; and the briefs of the case wer'
order ed to be stricken from tho fi:es.
+ In u. $. v. Late Corporation OF
Church of Jesus Chefs. If Later Ia.
Saints. language used in the petition
filed in effect accusing the court o
80 10 oh &c
his attorneys from an investigation
i; Of charges of gross misconduct in OF
fee and containing the statement tina
7 I'VE must decline to assume thu
functs ems of a grand jury. or attemp
to perform the duty OF the court Il
investigating the cOn0uct OF its OIL
GERS. was held to be contemptuous
211 P. $40.
In, re Terry, SO Fed. 419 an extrem
: case. for charging the court with ha'
ing zee, briheu res re-'T
from the court room by the marsha
acting under an order from the bencf
and using abusive language, enc g
the defendants was sent to !ali
: thirty days and the other for s.
months Judge erry. who had nc
: made any accusation against IN
court sought RELEASE ard TO pc purs
: au Of the contempt by a sworn n:+'
: :on in which he alleged thai II II
: transaction he did not have the sigh
est idea of showing any disrespect
he ccurt. It was held that this con-
: rot avail or relieve him and it wa
: said:
"The law imputes an intent to a
: ccmplish the natural result OF enc
e acts. and. when those acts are It
? criminal nature, it Will not accep
2eainst such implication the de''ia'
/ he transgressor No one would !
2 -efe if a denial CT wrCneful or erin
} nal intent would suffice to realese J
+ p;clator from the Punishment dne
t his offenses.'
/ In an application fer writ rf +
Y heas cOrpus growing out CT that cas-
Il Justice Harlan, speaking fer the S
s creme court CT the Unired States 81
s eve have seen that il IS settie
= 'Octr'na il the jur%sTrude beth
O 1nolopd apd of this country npy