Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-02-26

said the lawyer for any presentation OF
the plea by the respondents, at any stage
of the case. for ruling by the court.
except in a motion to dismiss all the
charges because replication had not
been filed to a plea of the statute as to
some of them He urged that the opin-
ion of Justice Wright was one accom-
panying the courts order. simply over
ruling the motion to dismiss the entire
proceedings in the case because of the
omission to file formal pleading. not
required by any rule, precedent or In
stance to be found in the entire history
of proceedings in contempt to a defense
applicable. if at all, to a part Of the
charges only.
Contempt Is Not Criminal.
Should the court allow the claim of
counsel for the labor men that the plea
Of the statute is preserved in the record.
Mr.. Darlington pointed out numerous
authorities tending to show that con-
tempt is not criminal" but partakes
merely of the nature Of a criminal pro
ceeding.. He also claimed inherent right
IN courts Of equity to punish for con-
tempt.
Ihe summary power to commit and
PUNISH Tor contempt" he said tending
10 opstruct or degrade the administra-
ton of justice is inherent I'm courts of
chancery and other superior courts. as
essential to the execution of their powers
and to the maintenance Of their author
ity
''The learned counsel for the resnond-
ents have not been able to cite any au-
thor1ty for the proposition that courts of
equity have not the same inherent mower
which. under all the authorities. belongs
70 all courts to punish disobedience and
insult to their dignity and authority. On
the contrary in every instance in which
a punitive sentence has been imposed for
contempt of the equity courts the pro-
eeeding has been instituted and prose-
cuted to the end i'm those courts The
origin and the universally Of this inher-
ent power in all courts. and the necessity
for it. is recognized i'm all the author
tiles upon the subject
Proceedings Properly Instituted.
The other questions of law involved in
the contempt proceedings were handled
by Attorney Clarence r. Wilson from the
viewpoint Of the committee He contended
with other things that the proceedings
were properly instituted under the res
ervation contained In the opinion of the
United States Supreme Court of May Is,
1911, which reversed the sentence i'm the
former contempt case. because improper
ly entitled in the old equity suit, but
without prejudice to the power and right
of the Supreme Court Of the District of
Columbia to punish, by proper pro-
ceeding, contempt. if any committed
against it."
The argument Of Attorney Daniel
Davenport for the committee was
based entirely on the facts as dis
closed in the record and was in refuta-
ton Of the propositions advanced yes
terday by Judge Alton B. Parker for
the labor leaders. The charges are
proved, Mr.. Davenport claimed. "out
of the mouths of the respondents them
selves" He quoted copiously from the
record to substantiate his position.
Attorney Davenport declared the al
legged violations Of the decree were will
full and asserted that legal annals dis
close mo such precedent of willful and
defiant disobedience and contempt OF
court authority"
Attorney Jackson III. Ralston late this
afternoon made the concluding argument
in behalf of the labor men.
A decision by the court is not con-
sidered likely before April.