Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1913-01-11
The Boise
Editors
Get Busy
UNDER HEAD "WHY NOT con.
TEMPT FOR PRAISE AS WELL
AS BLAME" THEY GIVE THE
SUPREME COURT.


One Of the theories laid down in the
books wherefore courts punish sum
marily as for contempt comments
tends to influence such court in the
administration Of justice. Care is
usually taken to declare that the
courts are not so influenced but the
idea seems to be that the real harm
comes to the public because of the be-
lief that such comments may so in
fluence the court. Thus 1t is made to
appear that the harm is to the pub
lie and not to the court.
The decisions Of all the courts which
hold to this view show that this belief
exists as to severe criticisms whether
merited or not,
But if a court could be influenced,
or If the people should or could be
led to fear that the court could be in
fluenced by criticism, whether merited
or unmerited, why should they like
wise not fear that the court would in
like manner be influenced by great
praise?
Suppose, for instance, a lower court
should render a decision in an i'm
portant case, and that the Judge so
rendering this decision should be Sc
yerely criticised while motion for
new trial was pending. The critic in
such case would be guilty of contempt
Of such court, on the theory that such
criticism might tend to influence or
to intimidate the Judge into granting
such new trial
But suppose, instead of severe crit
icism, there should be strong and full
some praise, Would not such praise
be just as likely to influence the judge
to refuse to grant a new trial, as the
criticism was to influence him to grant
the motion? And would not then, the
person who praises, be just as guilty
of contecpt as he who criticised?
1t seems so to us. Yet in all the
books and in all the decisions which
we have read, and to which our at
torneys have called our attention,
there Is no record Of a single instance
wherein case Of contempt has been
prosecuted wherein the court was
praised-not one.
Can it be regarded as possible that
at no time in the entire history of
American or English Jurisprudence, no
person or no newspaper ever praised
a court for It's decision? 1t does not
seem likely.
Why in a decision just rendered by
the highest court Of this state upon
contempt matter, the court itself re-
ferred in the following terms to a
case at the very moment pending in
one Of the courts of this county.
"More than a hundred criminal
cases Of dynamiting, the destruction of
vasts amount of property and the muir
der of scores Of innocent persons have
been the result Of those criminal acts
(of yellow journClism) And the
criminals have received great encour-
agement from the scurrilous, villain
Gus and criminal publications of such
journals, Courts have been almost
powerless In the matter because Of the
corruption and intimidation practiced
by such criminals and journals on the
people and juries. For much of this
criminal work the undertaking and
yellow journals are largely RESPONSE
bic and the result has been that but
very few of the criminals have been
convicted The tide, however seems to
be turning, Two dynamiters plead
guilty, and Il jury has recently found
3S more guilty"
Now the case wherein the 3S alleged
dynamiters were found guilty refer
ence to which was herein daubtess
made, was at that moment pending in
the courts Of the land. Is 1t possible
that this comment upon the part Of an
other court Of the land in a formal de-
cision handed down from the bench of
such court, would not tend to influ-
ence the action Of the court before
which such case was pending, to an
equal extent at least, as comment Of
a poor newspaper and editorial writer
upon case which he really believed
had passed fully and irrevocably be-
yond the power Of the court which had
considered 1t to recall or
alter It's decree therein?
We submit these questions and this
argument to the people for their CON
sideration of the difficulties of the
ordinary laymOn newspaper writer in
steering clear Of the shoals Of judi
clol contempt wherein sole power is
given to the court which believes
itself aggrleyed to determine whether
or not It is in fact aggrleycd and, If |
80, to determine what punishment |
shall adequately furnish balm for it's
aggrieyed spirits