Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-04-15

his brief or argument is to assist tuss
court in ascertaining the truth iper
tanning to the pertinent facts. the real
effect of decisions and the law app|i,
"a BE in the case, and he far oversg cps
a6ex bounds "a ,bb 4 4isnai conhiic9'
when he reports to nllsrepfesent 4 ionei
false charges or viiitication. / atc
He may July present, discuss and
argue the evidence and the law and
freely indicate wherein he Delle. es
that decisions and rulings are wrong or
erroneous, but tL4s he may do with
cut effectually making bald accusa-
tiops age1I-st Tls motives fald intel11-
sence f@ttfa court, or beAng discour-
teous or resorting to abuse which, is
not argument nor convincing 10 .reaz
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
far,- and which tae people. through
the Constitution and bv general con.
'~AAh nave luNiu GIT iIlidl !IlttIb NfpI'
Of the laws which ne. as an officer,
CD the celfrts has sworn to uphold
and protect.
TT ., ..a. nc srn 81 plain that auv
departure from them ny member
Of the bar would seem to be willful
and Intentional misconduct. 800.
z 81 Z .n1nish for
contempt and 20 maintain dlgnitv in
their proceedings is inherent and is,
p cd as courts are old. 1t is also
ssreyIdeas bvzsfatuHeSzssB we
note the adjudications and penalties
iIf pbs Cd IN "a few Of the many cases.
.om Cettlngham imprisoned El-
~lrnd Iechmere Charlton barrieter
and member Of the House OF Com
mons for sending q scand 0us lett ar
10 ere Of the masters Of the cOur+,
and q committee from that body. after
an investigation. reported that in their
Cpinion his "claim to be DISCHARGED
from imprisonment by reason Of pmvl-
IetGe of parliament ought not to be
admitted" Milne and Craig al7.
When ehe case Of People vs. Tweed
in New York came up a second time
before the same Judge. before the trial
canlnfeE ced. the prisf naf's counsel nri-
vately handed 10 the judge ? letter
cCucJed in respectful language. IN
witch they stated. substantially, that
their client feared, from THE circu'n-
stances Of the former trial, that the
iulse had o,nrceiyed a. prejudice
sssfs So fifl{i sid thai rfs (! ives
net in tho unbiased condition neces-
sarv to afford. an impartial trial, and
respectfully requested him to ccnsid-
WsethesssAse&ssia,li ssEallslr u n
the dutv Of presiding at the trial TO
some other Judge, at the Fame time
I declerins .that no&eesstnal oisrespect
vas Intended toward III. Judge Of IT,
--eeurt- The-ludge. retained the letter
end Of the triAll. -sentenseal three
Of TIE, writer's std a fine of s25t each.
and k'dblicallv reprima nded I'll ,Gtn-
ersl Lhesjunioc a6sinsel, at the tine ev-
pressn4ge the ioplhion that if SUCH A
thi7kfad been sane by them in Eng
Iapd.they ,.wotft.Shaye been. .'evpeuea
frbsn the bar within one 4hafar" THE
/. efsangas Ne tfa sirqal Entqtsastea that
+ 4 ss s~.anleaa no, cSsts'rr+ -
ectnrt 9and that thev fifelt and
| ss,teDfaf to- eSrress. snp disres-
BE q rcr the. Judge bd.: shaa thei- az
! tit,'ses f29} bean taken III EfrtFerance 81
/ What ley deem. 2. - Z. v. y ~ nra-+@;
NcFA cir client aT7 -he frs.hf--r OVID
>i.t,n = io,is,N hssnr aroe - - - f'ntr
TIC it'fge- a-rt-~,fetf the -etiee1a ne #
personal .disrespect but. refusea 70
Z seheve the aisoa imer of infartian to
J cen nit a. eopt9apt and enforced t'e
inS
rs Am. R. TSP.
Z kFor% sending to a strict iu'ea 'cr'r
! rf 'cerrt a letter stating that The
NAV, haxs g Is asre.t'v con
trary to every principal OF faw, and
every body .nows :, | believe avid y
is our desire that no such decision
4 Observation-Disclosures ccur-
We practice in An attorney wes f1ee
$50 and suspended from practlce. unit
the amount shoulu be paid. In &c
livering tNo cnninn &c tho Supreme
Court of Kansas in Re Prior. 10 Kan
70. 26 Am. 747, Brewer J.. said:
Upon this we remark, in 10 frs
p Mace that the language of this lette,
is very insulting. To say to a judge
that a certain rul-ng which he has
r"de Is contrary ID every principle c
law and that everybody move y
certainly q most severe imputatioh
We rem orll secondly. that an attel
ney is under special obligations to b.
, cpuslderate ana respectful in las cor
duct and communication ito irdge
, He is an rFicar 81 tho court rn1 il j
therefore his atty to uphold is homo
ard dignity. The Independence CT tt
profession cdrr;es with it the r'i%h
freely to challenge. criticise ard cor
denim all matters and things under n
view and in evidence. y viii -thi
privilege sgSas stAe, corr"%nondiner obi
Il cation CT constant courtesy nnd rex
81 peot towara the tflgrwal n which III
proceedings are pending And tn
fact that the tribunal is an inferio
Gre ana ssa rulings not f~ol ara wifi
,,eeYt sappeal. does not diminish in tn
4 slfgh esq sdegree this ohligationz q
a court esy and respect. A Justice, 9
thea .Eaacn before whom the most tri