Carolina watchman. [volume] (Salisbury, N.C.) 1871-1937, 1909-11-09
CONTEMPT Of SUPREME COURT.
The Chattanooga Defendants Denied Re-
hearIng-To be Sentenced on the 18th.


hearing-To be Sentenced on the 18th.
The unusual proceeding of al
arraignment for sentence at th'
bar of the Supreme Court of th'
United States will be witnessed
two weeks from today, in accord
ance with an announcement made
| to-day in the cases of Joseph Il
shlpp, of Chattanooga, Tenn,
and f7e co-aefendants, charged
with contempt. The court to-day
denied motions for a re-h earring
of the cases.
The cases originated in the
courts decision in March, 1906.
to consider the appeal of a negro
named Ed. johnson from YER
dict of the Tennessee courts, hold.
ing him guilty and sentencing him
to be hanged on charge of Grim
NAL assault. The night after the
determination of the Supreme
Court to review the proceedings in
the case was wired to Chattanoo-
ga, where Johnson was confined
in jail, a number of people storm
ed the Jail and took him out and
lynched him.
Tho court was much lncensed
over the lynching, and at its in
stance the Attorney General in
stituted proceedings agains t
Ship, who was the sheriff, the
j@i|er and IS Others supposed to
have been implicated in the lynch
ing, charging them with contempt
of the Supreme Court. Many of
the accused were exonerated and
in the end only six were found
guilty. These were Sheriff Shipp,
MS deputy Jeremiah Gibson, who
was the jailer, Luther Williams,
Nick Nolan, Henry Padgett and
William Mayes, residents of
Chattanooga.
The finding Of the court was an
nounced in May, just before the
close of the last term Of the court,
but all the defendants eDtered mo-
tions for rehearing, which hao
the effect of postponing action un-
til the present term. The court
,oday. through Chief Justice Full
ler, announced its denial of the
motions, the Chief Justice stating
at the same time the decision to
have the defendants appear on
November Is to receive the sem
tence.
The court has the discretion to
either fine or imprison the men or
to inflct both penalties, and no
intimation has been given as to
what course may be pursued. 1t
is only known that from the be-
ginning of the proceeding the
court has appeared exceptionally
interested IN the case and is be-
lieved to feel that an example
must be m de to prevent other
indignities to the court.
1t is recalled, however, that
several of the members of the
court, among whom was the late
Justice Packham, dissented from
the verdict of the majority, which
may have thu effect of lessening
the severity Of the sentence.
The only instance of sentence
for contempt in the courts his
tory occurred IN 1875, when one
John Chlles, who was concerned
in dealings in Texas indemnity
bonds contrary to an order of the
court, was ordered to pay a fiue
of $3.50 for contempt. This time
there will be six men instead of
one, and the proceedings will
therefore be unprecedented as re.
garde numbers.
All tho defendants assert limo.
c4nce. Shipp and Gibson declare
there was DO advance indication
Of VIC 'ence to Johnson and say
that otherwise they would have
taken better nrecautlon. Most
Of the ether men implica ted
claim not to have been present
when the negro was killed by the
mob.-Washington dispatch 1st.