The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1923-05-10
J0URNA | lists IN
JAIL FOR PRINTING.
RECORD Of COURT.
Leech, Bethea And Robinson
Held In Contempt BY
Judge HefIin

CONTINUED from Page one)
swer of the defendants to the com
plant showed they approved the
principles outlined by the judge, but
that no further statement would be
not sufficient and denied the stay of
sentence.
The men were Immediately taken
to the county jail. They were as
signed TO a first floor cell contain
ing private bath. lavatory and two
an attache explained, entertaining
legal friends who commisserated
with them on the action of Judge
Heflin. They will be released at
1880 o'clock Thursday afternoon.
Bethea and Robinson remarked
they were in Jail for the first time.
Leech had a similar experience in
Memphis a few years ago. having
been sentenced to serve ten days in
Jail for contempt by Chancellor
Heiskell.
No Disrespect Intended.
During the course of the trial
Wednesday afternoon, Mr.. Baker i'm
pressed upon the court that he want
ed the record to show that L stated
in court at their direction that at
time of publication the defendants
neither felt or intended any dis
respect or attempted in any way to
influence the VERIFY case
Points stressed by Mr.. Baker were
that the defendants were not accused
of any disrespect for the court in the
citation, although Judge Helm re-
peatedly referred to such disrespect
and that the right of free press is
just as important as the right of
free speech.
Picking up the statement of Judge
Helm that the defendants had pre-
scented defiant attitude, Mr.. Baker
quickly assured the judge that he
would not be in this court defending
these men If l thought that their at
titude was disrespectful"
Baker Arouses Mirth.
This was one of many bits of by
play during the afternoon hearing in
which Mr.. Baker caused ripples of
mirth to run through the audience at
every sally, smoothly and calmly is
suing from his lips. Judge Helms
rejoinder to Mr.. Baker that that
these men apparently think they
have the right to do this" referring
to publication of the Yerby story.
The answer of these men was dig
nified and showed no lack of respect
for the court" replied Mr.. Baker.
There was no purpose to obstruct
JustiCS III lAo Sdst "a ISloSs w c
make children promise to behave. but
if grown men go wrong we deal with
them on the merits of the case. There
was no. desire to prejudice the case as
their complete disclaimer shows"
We'll, I will permit Mr.. Davis to
examine the witness, concluded Judge
Heflin, referring to the attempt to
place George kitzinger on the stand.
Mr.. Baker had argued that no wit
nesses could be introduced after the
states demurrer to the answer of
the defense had been sustained. The
answer was based on the fact that
the information contained in the
story in question was of common
knowledge.
1.-THE defendants concede that they
three were equally responsible for
the publication and they are willing
to admit they are connected with The
Birmingham Post" said Mr.. Baker.
I'VE admit it to save time. OF course
it is true and admitted that Jurge
Fort declared a mistrial in this same
case because of q publication in The
Post and that he told Mr.. Robinson
that the case had been postponed for
this reason. But we do submit that
he may have been not warned to
publish any more articles or merely
articles in that form. At any rate
he was not on trial at that time"
In answer to question as to
whether a promise had been exacted
from Robinson not to write any more
stories about the case. Robinson
shook his head when Mr.. Baker
turned to him and asked the question.
Mr.. Baker then repeated that no dis
respect had been intended to the
court and that no intention Of OBJ
structFg justice was apparent
Gives Hint of Attitude.
Judge Heflin then gave broad
hint of what was to come.
THE law and constitution guaran-
tees to every citizen a fair trial by
an unprecedented jury" he declared
When q defendant is indicted for
capital offense. when upon convic-
ton he may be put to death. no high
er duty can rest upon the court than
to safeguard the defendants right to
fair trial. This right belongs to
every citizen regardless of his sta
ton. whether he is good citizen or
a bad criminal. The courts under
the laws are the tribunals authorized
to provide for fair trials.
"lf the court is powerless to see
that every defendant gets fair trial,
then it is not what is intended l am
one Of the judges who will not admit
that the courts are powerless. This
is a question not so much OF the
freedom of the press as the suprem-
acy of the courts. No creature of a
newspaper or corporation is greater
than the republic itself. When a
newspaper influences jury. then |
say that creature is more powerful
than the courts.
II have no disposition to punish
these men If they submit. but they
say they have done nothing more
than they have a right to do.
Published Many Times.
All facts mentioned in this article
in question had been published many