Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1913-01-02
PUBLICATION Of CRITICISM
OF THE court DECISION
HELD TO Be IN CONTEMPT

we, as judges have less at stake than
the people, and regardless OF conse-
quences which we could not have
averted without dereliction of duty
! and degradation of the court.
Demurrer Of Defendants.
Tn presenting the demurrer, coun-
sci for defendants, Sheridan and
Broxon. argued. first, that the in
: formation alleged no contempt; second,
that the state should have been made
the plaintiff in this proceeding; third.
that the case concerning which said
; publications We're made. to-wit: The
state of Idaho ex rel. Spofford VS.. w.
l.. Clifford as secretary of state of the
state of IDAHO was not pending be-
fore this court at the time said pub
LEGATIONS were made; fourth, that the
court has no jurisdiction of this pro-
ceeding.
"GD The first question then, Is.
I Does the information allege sufficient
facts to show contempt?
1T is alleged that said defendants
Sheridan, BroXon and Cruzen, con-
trolled the policy of said Evening Cap
ital News during the time said pub
lications We're made; that said articles
We're intended to Influence this court
In Its decision In said case, and that
said editorials and articles tended to
bring said supreme court into disre-
pute and lessen the respect due its
authority and were unwarranted and
contemplate and is contumacious at
tack upon said court and the Judges
thereof and are defamatorv and were
calculated to impede the administra-
ton of Justice; that said editorials and
Gother articles We're wlful and malicious
misrepresentation of the attitude and
holding of said court concerning said
| cause, and wilfully and maliciouslv
misrerresented the position the court
took with reference to said cause and
matter: and that said articles were
intended to distort said decision and
were intended and calculated to inn
pede the administration of justice and
| TO defame the court
In five Of said articles the follow
Ing language appears: 1t is imposs-
4 bic to protest too strongly against
/ what IS literally the infamy OF this
| decision; 'reactionary conduct of re-
! dictionary court; IT is an attempt to
| beat the cause by tricl1ery and chican-
| cry And in another article the fol-
| lowing language is used: The decision
| is an outrage and a fragrant instance,
fortunately rare. of the attempted con-
! troll of politics by the bench. 1t Is as
| tyranntcal as the action of the Taft
state committee at Aberdeen and the
| national committee at Chicago, and
worse, because 1t was perpetrated by
q court. In another The more con-
ivlncing becomes the belief that the de-
cision was purely and solely a political
and personal one And again: our
state supreme court Is the accommo-
dating one Again: "A decision which
Is defended and supported in Idaho by
no honest or honorable man today
And referring to said decision, 1t Is
said The Republican state central
committee Is directly responsible for
one of the greatest crimes ever COM
mitted against the electoral franchise |
of the people Of the United States In |
large headlines IS the following Only /
q part Of the story is told. Agreement
on senatorship Is said to be far-reach- |
ing Recalls decision OF the supreme /
court 1t is stated in that article F
that the action Of the court paved the T
way for Haines for governor and 7
Stewart for justice of the supreme T
court, and later the naming of Ailshie T
for United States senator
Refers to Senatorship.
said article purports to give a ru-
NOR TO the effect that upon the death /
OF Senator Hepburn an agreement
was made whereby Judge Ailshie
was To receive sufficient support to
elect him United States senator and +
that Judge Bulge OF the Fifth judicial
district court would be elevated from
the district court bench TO the SUI
preme bench to fill the vacancy caused
by the election of Judge Ailshie, and
that In order to carry this plan to COM
pletlon, II would be necessary to pro-
cure the election of Haines as COVER
nor, and in order to satisfy the par
ties who We're In the combination, the
ROOSEVELT electors We're eliminated
from the ticket by a decision of the
supreme court upon a suit filed for that
purpose. and that In order to obtain
unanimous decision of the supreme
court II was necessary to take care
Of Judge Stewart, who was a candidate
for reelection, and that Il this COM
bination could be carried out by the
court on its part by rendering said de-
cision, the southeastern. or Mormon
counties, would support Judge Stew
art and Haines and the entire Repub-
lican ticket. The viciousness and
absurdity of this statement are made
apparent at once when attention Is
called to the fact that Senator Hey
burns death occurred unexpectedly ten
days after the decision of the Spofford
case was rendered. The direct charge
is there made against the court that
II rendered said decision by reason OF
a political trade or bargain and not
on the law and facts. What greater
wrong can be charged against a court
than that its decision was obtained by
a political trade or bargain7 Official
corruption of the worst kind is there
That charge was made reck-
lessly and deliberately and is n Grim
inal contempt In effect 1t charges the
judges with the violation of their Off
cial oaths and the court with being ae-