Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-01-27
SCORED BY THE COURT
Strange Case of Contempt in a
London Tribunal.
ROW WITH THE STANDARD
Cabinet Ministers the Subject of Very
Severe Censure.
PROCEEDINGS UNPRECEDENTED
Judge Said He Could Not Recall an
Instance Where offense Had
Been So Grave.
ROW WITH THE STANDARD
PROCEEDINGS UNPRECEDENTED
Special Cablegram to The Star

Special Cablegram to The Star.
LONDON, January 26.-Two judges of the
high court Of Justice had an extraordinary
experience today in hearing an application
for the commitment of a cabinet minister
for contempt of court. The case arose out
of public speech by John Burns, president
of the local government board, last Thurs
day. The Standard has recently been pub
fishing a series of articles dealing in the
severest fashion with the financial and
other methods of the London county coun-
Gil. The articles grew hot that the Lon
don county council was unable to save it's
face without taking action of some sort
Accordingly twelve, councillors in behalf Of
the London county council entered a libel
action against the Standard, and the case
will be heard in March.
Mr.. Burns, who is also a member Of the
London county council, Thursday laid
aside the methods of statesman and made
whirling attack on the Standard. He de-
clared that if the Standard could prove the
ISLANDERS 1t should have taken the evidence
to court where the issue could have
been tried straight away, namely, the local
government board. Mr.. Burns then discuss
ed the case in way which might naturally
have been expected to result in his COM
initial for contempt, for the law here re-
CARDS with the sternest eye comments on
cases which are still sub judice.
Unprecedented Language.
Justice Darling in giving the decision of
the court referred to Mr.. Burns conduct
in language never heard before in modern
times when a dignitary of the bench was
speaking of minister Of the crown.
In regard to the Standards application,
he said: IAN extraordinary and very re-
grettable state Of things lay after the writs
had issued. Mr.. Burns speech in comment
ing on the conduct of the Standard and
suggesting that better tribunal than the
courts Of justice would have been what he
calls court and what is not court but
a public department over which he, as a
member of his majesty's government, pre-
sides, was unusual.
81 do not remember a case where min
lister of the crown thought 1t consistent
with his public duties to take sides In
LITIGATION, in which, in his own opinion, his
own department might be called upon to
give decision. 1t is said that this amounts
to contempt of this court, but in order to
see that it does must look not only to
the fact that things. were said which GER
afnly ought not to have been said, and
desire to say very plainly that in my opin-
ion they ought never to have been said by
any one at all, certainly not by person
in the position Of the gentleman against
whom this ruling is asked, but when that
is established we have still to look to see
whether our opinion In the matter COM
planned of really is Such as WOulQ ledQ US 10
think it would prejudice the trial of the
action or would influence the jury so that
they could not come to this case inclined to
do justice thoroughly by the parties"
Dismissed the Application.
After giving warning that others should
not be encouraged to commit similar con-
tempt the judge dismissed the application
on contemptuous grounds, saying no injury
could be effected by such vile language as
that Of Mr.. Burns The judge, in announc-
ing his decision, said: lit is difficult to
say Of other people what kind Of literature
or oratory will influence them, but can
not see that such speeches as this Will ad-
vance the case Of the plaintiffs or damage
that Of the defendants. The very violence
of 1t, the very grotesqueness of the sugges-
ton that a proper person to try this case
is the gentleman who made this speech,
would, to my mind, prevent 1t from having
the effect of influencing jury against the
defendants. Therefore. upon the ground
that although the speech was one of extra
ordinary indiscretion and impropriety,
showing very slight regard for the admin
istration of justice by the courts of the
king, yet, upon the ground that I cannot
see that it was really calculated to pre-
vent a fair trial, think there should be no
ruling granted in this case
The other judge agreed with Justice
Darling.