The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1913-01-09
JUSTICE AILSHIE DISSENTS
IN BOISE CONTEMPT CASE
Thinks the Penalty Pronounced too Severe for the Oense
Committad; Thinks Cruzon
Not Guilty

paper contempt case in which he
concurs in part and dissents in
part, was delivered from the
bench and while much shorter
opinion than that of the majority
of the court, it reviewed the lib
erty of the press and held that
A. r. Cruzen, under the evidence,
was not guilty of contempt and
did not own stock in or control
the policy of the Capital News,
while R. S. Sheridan and C. O..
Broxon, were guilty of the con-
tempt charge, Jail sentence
should not be given, and only a
nominal fine. The opinion is as
follows:
."In view of the public Importance
of this matter and the fact that
it is the first of it's kind in this
court, l deem it my duty to brief
ly express my views both as to
the law and the facts of the case.
Il think the press as well as
the people generally of this state
desire the orderly and unobstruct-
ed administration of the laws of
the land in this jurisdiction, and
for that very reason | deem it
important that in this, the first
case of its nature to arise in the
state, the law obtaining here
should be clearly and definitely
stated. If that be done, those
who respect the law will observe
it, and those who disregard or
hold it in contempt will know the
consequences of their action. So
far as | am aware, no court among
English speaking people has ever
wholly denied the right of power
of the courts to punish for con
tempt. This power is not given
to or assumed by courts for the
protection of the judges. They
as individuals have the same pro
lection under both the civil and
criminal laws that the law gives
to every citizen. This power is
selves when they create courts
and is exercised by the courts as
the constituted agencies of society
for the preservation and efficient
service of that department of
government in order that the adj
ministration of justice as be-
tween litigants, on the one hand,
and litigants and the people on
the other hand may not be embar-
rassed, delayed, impeded or swerv
ed from the true course of law
and justice by intimidation,
charges or threats Of any kind.
The judicial department Of gov
ernment necessarily occupies
different position from either of
the. other departments, and, owing
to the nature of its duties, must
discharge them chiefly in public
sittings and hearings which should
be as nearly as possible orderly
and free from bias, prejudice,
fear or resentment
Power of Courts.
"There are well defined grounds
on which there is no dispute or
controversy as to the powers and
duties of courts. The whole diff
ficulty arises in this class of cas-
es as to just where the boundary
line lies beyond which the power
ceases and the court should not
go. 1t is true that this power
may be and sometimes has been
abused; it is also true that Wher-
ever power is lodged it may be
abused, but the possibility or
danger of abuse of power is no
argument in favor of abolishing
all power and the agencies exer-
cising the authority of organized
society. No one, I presume,
would contend for a moment that
court can not by summary pro-
cess, protect itself against an as
sault and attempt to drive the
judges from the bench and break
up its sessions. The court could
Immediately order the arrest and
- .nishment of such person. This
'N<s not an unheard of or improb-
Us,