The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1922-04-30
A SERIOUS POINT INVOLVED.

Tho action OF the city commission In barring
Attorney Pratt from appearing before It seems
to raiso a very serious question The point is
made that n representative of citizens has an
inolienable right to appear before any governing
body for the purpose of prefcrring requests petl-
tlons or complaints.
This Is sound doctrine. too But It should he
borne In mind that in this privilege there is also
an implied ohllgation-that such representative
OF tho citizenship shall conduct his In n
scemly manner, shall deport himself n gentle
man, and shall assume and maintain an attitude
Of proper respect for the official body
Every official body is clothed with the In
hcrent right to protect Itself from insult and TO
enforce proper rules and dccorum. Thus the
courts, tho palladium OF tho peoples liberties
and open alike to rich and poor. great and small
charged with tho duty Of determining what Is
Justice between citizens, what their rights under
tho law and tho constitution, have and do not
hesitate 20 exercise tho authority to discipline
vulgarlans who appear before them for practice;
have and exercise tho right to bar individuals
who Ignore the amenities and the rules Of pro-
cedurc or show dsrespcct to tho tribunal.
The question in the case of Attorney Pratt
turns the proprcty OF his attitude towards
the city commission, And who Is prepared to
say that the mayor and commissioners could
have done lees In sclf-respcct than to refuse him
the right to appear before the board with his
continued direct charges OF crimnalty on their
part?
Perhaps no public body In this city has been
subjected to tho deliberate insults and continued
dsrcspect on the part OF many people posing rs
good citizens and gentlemen. as has the present
city administration. Attorney Pratt few weeks
ago, filing many cases in the district court specl-
fled long list OF allegations against the city
officials, every one OF which constituted felony
and proceeded TO a long and panstaking trial of
one OF these cases. Tho decision OF the court in
the case specifically stated that no evidence had
been offered sustaining these charges.
Yet Attorney Pratt continuing his tactics ap-
pears before tho commission again and again
and virtually repeats in another case the
charges he set up In the original and which
the court had found to be without tho slightest
foundation in fact. We submit that no self
respecting public official. no tribunal worthy OF
sitting could be expected to remain silent
under such insults. Tho World feels that Mayor
Evans and his associates did precisely right in
barring tho gentleman from further appearing
before them. There are pleaders capable Of
caring adequately for the interest of any client
who sec the propricty OF avoiding personal IN
suits In their procedure.
While public official is open to fair crit
| icism at all times, In his presence and while in
! tho discharge OF his public functions every pub
! lie official, whether he be the lowest or the
highest not only has the right to exact respect
ful attitude on the part OF those who appear be-
fore him. but he Is charged with the RESPONSE
bility OF enforcing such attitude else every
form of the public service would speedily de-