Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-03-31


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 yilification.
He may Iully present, discuss and
argue the evidence and the law and
freely indicate wherein he benet es
that decisions and rulings are wrong or
erroneous but tins he may do with
out effectuaIly 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 a mem
ber 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 p member
Of the bar would seem to be willful
and intentional misconduct.
The power Of courts to punish for
contempt and to maintain dignity in
heir proceedings is inherent and is
IS Old as courts are old. 1t is also
provided by statute BY analogy we
note the adjudicarions and penalties
imposed in a few of the many cases.
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 a committee from that body. after
an investigation. reported that in their
opinion his 'claim to be discharged
from imprisonment by reason Of priv
legde of parliament ought not to be
admitted" 2 Milne and Craig. 81.
when lhe case Of People vs.. Tweed
in New Work came up 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
lich they stated. substantially. that
their client feared from the circum-
stances Of the former trial, that the
/ Judge had conceived prejudice
against him. and that his mind was
not in the unbiased condition neces-
sarv to afford an impartial trial and
respectfully requested him ID cCns'd-
er whether he should not relinoush
the duty Of presiding at the trial 70
some other judge. at the same time
declaring t1at nc personal dlsresDect
was intended toward the Judge of the
court. The Judge retained the letter
and went on with the trial At the
7 n~d Of the trial O sentenced three
of the writer's TO a fine of $3.50 each
aal ruhlicallv roDrimanded the 9th
err. the junior counsel. AT the +iroo ey
pressing the opinion that if such a
thing had been zone by them in Eng
land. they would have been "exppned
from the bar within one hour" The
counsel at the lime protested that
,aev intended no contempt Of
court and that they felt enc
intended to express no disres
Dect for the Judge but that their az
ton had been taken in furtherance o.
what they deemed >-e veal interests
of cir client and the faithful ana
conscientious DISCHARGE If Tho - F3lt,-
The Judge accented the disclaimer e
personal disresnnct. hur rpfuCna -
believe the disclaimer of intention to
commit a contempt and enforced the
fines. II Albany Law Journal 40S
26 Am, K, 1872.
For sending to r strict iudoa o,-
Of court letter STATING that "The
ruling Won have made ic fireo+1,- ron
trsrv to pvnrv nrincina7 nj law anc
every body ,.nows believe aud +.
is our desire that no such docislor
shall stand unrnvnrsod IN any cr,,r+
We nracticn in " an ettornnv was f,,n
$50 and susnended from nracIIco ,1nt5
the amount shouIu he Maid In do
Hverine the oD;nior If the Srnrere
Court of Kansas in Re Prior Is Kan
- oG Am 747 Brewer I said.
"T-p0n this we remark. in 10 fre
o19ce tnat t1>a language of this 1nr4n,
is very insultiug. To saw to indof
that a certain rulng which he hae
made is contrary to every Drfncinln a