Arizona republican., 1921-08-23

UIUlII UlUl LLHULU, SO H|zzONER DENIES }
 COURT ID REPORTER.
 The readers of The Republican for some indefinite period will be denied noteworthy contribution to the gayety of nations, a perusal of the daily proceedings of the Phoenix po- lice court which it appears Judge Thomas, sometimes magistrate of that tribunal, has arrogated to him. self as personal institution, as in- dividually his own, as MT. Burleson once thought the postoffices of the country were his.
 . On Saturday, Judge Thomas issued san order excluding The Republicans police reporter, Ward Adams, from his court room, making the order perpetual, though it was considerate- ly provided that in case he should be witness in case or party to a case, his presence would be permit ted. Thus MT. Adams was granted the retention of fragment of his constitutional privileges and the right to discharge such duty as might be imposed upon him in the capacity of a witness. MT. Adams had at least that much to be thankful for. MT. Thomas called up The Repub- lican soon after the issuance of this order stating that it had been issued. hut cd hxr he D l. can that on reflection over Sunday. a day which should be devoted to meditation, this order would be re- 1 scinded.
 But it was not. MT. Adams as usual presented himself at the ses- sion of the court yesterday and was again informed that he was persona non grata- However. the court stated that the order had been somewhat softened. Said the court in sub | stance:
 An order was issued in this court l Saturday. denying you the privilege of attendance here until such time as you publicly make a true statemen, | of facts in regard to the story which | you published in last Saturdays l Arizona Republican. This court l therefore, asks you to leave" ss. l MT. Adams declined immediately to l leave. but was quickly escorted ou, of the court by q member of the l police r The story to which the order O, l exclusion makes reference had to dt with the arrest and conviction of 2 I woman found guilty, with some I others. of a violation of the socia ordinance. There was no criticism o the court and it was not intended b, MroAdams to criticize the court o to question the propriety of the sen tence he imposed upon this defen dant. It appeared that at the tim of her arrest she had been guilty O no unlawful act. though she is sal to have admitted that at anothe time and place within a period s recent as to come under the form o the language "on or before" she hal been guilty of an unlawful act. Sh was therefore convicted and pun ished as she should have been, if s guilty.
 , There was omitted from the stor, ,, no doubt as there would not hay ! been. if MT. Adams had been awar 2 tof it. this fact, relating to the admis l, sion of the woman of her previou ! misconduct and by that omission, did not imagine that he was preju dicing the court.
 If the court had been deserving ( : criticism it should have received It is not generally understood ithS , police and other courts, for tha has been stated there appeared her
 no cause for criticism and none wa intended.
 The reporter stated that the wom
 an was about to become mother, fact not brought out in the proceed
 ings, but which was made known {
 the reporter later.
 It is suspected that the part (
 the story which has offended th
 court was a statement that ,her
 had been a lack of emotionalism
 the trial of this woman, no play (
 mercy or sympathy. Certainly ,f
 reporter intended there to make r
 reflection upon the court. but ratns to compliment him. The judge wh
 gives way to his emotions, either ths
 of sympathy or prejudice in the di.
 charge of his duties, is an unfit ol'
 dangerous judge.
 There was injected into the stoi
 a certain degree of color. only enoug
 in the view of the reporter to mal
 it fairly readable and to distinguis
 it from a dry y-as-dust relation of
 police court incident. As is state
 there was in the mind of he -report'
 no purpose to criticize the court ;,
 to convey that she had had more tha
 was coming to her.
 Judge Thomas seems to have errt
 in the summary issuance of the o
 der. No doubt, if when he felt al
 grieved at the narration as it al
 peared. he had made known
 grievance to the reporter, MT. Adam
 would have cheerfully removed it
 a published statement setting out il
 views of the judge. He is estoppe
 though, from complying with the u
 timatum of the judge demanding
 public recantation.
 S In a telephone message to T,
 Republican as to his order of e r. pulsion, Judge Thomas stated tn H The Republican would be perinitt S to send another reporter to his cou
 in place of Mir. Adams. That "
 gracious, but The Republican is u
 able to avail itself of this geEero proffer. It is not sure that it has
 member of it's staff whose views handling news matter would nleasu
 up to those of Judge Thomas. reporter who should fail to do 8 would have to retire, covered wi W chagrin. In the course of time {
 morale of the whole staff would
 destroyed in consequence of the lo
 of pep and zip of it's individual mer bers.
 There is still another reason W
 The Republican cannot accept t