South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1918-04-17
MOTION TO DISCHARGE
CASE WHICH WAS OVER
RULED BY THE COURT
CONTINUED FROM PAGE oNED


that the court would refuse
changes of venue contrary 20 law
C.. said charge that the words
in said publication. namely. Pro
poses to put stop TO venuinE cases
from his court according TO law"
cannot be the subject Of proceed
ings in contempt for the reason
that said words refer only 10 al
legged future action Of the court
and do not refer 10 any pending
proceeding.
4. That the charge in said in
formation referring TO said pub
LEGATION in the words following:
no alternative for Court-The
affidavit filed by O'Nein in Rein
hart vs.. ReinhaIt,' Cmeaning
Rhinehalt VS.. BhinehalD, is
purely formal affair. available 10
any litigant who may at any time
and for any reason. which need
not he given. feel that a judge is
biased or Trejudiced in a partic-
ular case. There is no alterna-
tive but for the court 70 grant the
motion. the allegation that the
judge is biased and prejudiced'
being formal. and declared by the
statute sufficient in law without
reasons. The statute was passed
by the legislature in 1919. is
insufficient in each of the follow
ing several particulars
A. That it is not charged that
said words were false
p. That said charge fails to
specify i'm what particular said
words were false.
c. That said charge fails to
specify or allege i'm what manner
or in what respect said words
were inaccurate or grossly mac
curate.
d. That said words cannot be
made the basis for contempt for
the reason that the same consti-
tute only an opinion of the pub
Usher as to the law and do not
in any way constitute any false
or grossly inaccurate statement OF
any proceeding of the court.
+. That the innuendo OF the
charge that said words were in
tended TO mean that whSn in any
case, matter or proceeding before
the court, an affidavit was filed
the court could not question the
applicability Of the statutes which
provide for changes of venue to
the case, matter or proceeding
then before the court, and that
the court had no alternative but
TO grant the change Of venue
asked for is not warranted by
the words published.
+ That it is not alleged that
said words had reference to any
pending proceeding.
G. That the charge that said
words were intended to mean
that when in any case. matter or
proceeding before the court. an
affidavit was filed the court could
not question the applicability OF
the statutes which provide for
changes OF venue to the case,
matter or proceeding then before
the court. and that the court had
change of venue asked for"
shows on its face that said words
had reference only to future pro-
ceedings in said court and not TO
any pending proceeding
II. That the charge that said
words We're intended to convey
the meaning to the public mind.
that in taking the matter afore-
said under Amusement the court
was 'untutored in the formalities
of Indiana law is not war
ranted by said published words
I. That the charge that said
words were intended to convey
the meaning to the public mind.
that in ticking the matter afore-
said under advisement the court
was 'untutored in the formalities
of Indiana law cannot be made
the basis of contempt of court
for the reason that it is not within
the province of the court TO pre-
vent criticism Of the ability Of the
judge of the court
J. That said charge that said
words were intended 10 convey
the meaning to the public mind.
that in taking the matter afore-
said under advisement the court
was 'untutored in the formalities
Of Indiana law is not alleged
TO have been i'm regard TO any
pending proceeding
3. That said information fails
10 show or aIege that said ar
ticle, report and comment as a
whole was either false or grossly
inaccurate.
WHEREFORE this defendant
moves that the rule 10 show cause
hereinbefore issued be set aside
and discharged.
Anderson. Parker. CrabiH and
Crumpacker.
McInernys Yeagley & McVicker.
Eli r. Seebirt.
DrummOnd G Drummond.
VIM =. O'Neiu.
Van Fleet, Hubbell q Dinner.
Attys. for Defendant