The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1932-01-07
PRESS LIBERTY
IS AT STAKE IN
HEARING TODAY
Newton D. Baker to Lead
Fight Against Court Gag
on Newspaper.
REPORTERS ARE BARRED
Battle Grows Out of Ban
Imposed by Judge in
Murder Trial.
REPORTERS ARE BARRED
BY FOSTER EATON
United Press stan Correspondent

FRANKFORT, KY, Jan. IA
newspaper fighting for freedom of
the press and judge fighting for
absolute control over his court
waged battle her today in the Ken
lucky court Of appeals.
Newton d. Baker, wartime sec
rotary of war and potential presi-
Dental candidate, led legal counsel
for the Knoxville CTenn0 News
Sentinel, Scripps- Howard news
paper, in its petition to set aside a
dictum barring representatives Of
the paper from reporting dehbera-
tons Of Judge Henry r. Prewitt's
circuit court at Mt. Sterling, sixty
eight miles east of here.
Prewitt banned News-SentineI
representatives from his court be-
cause of alleged "libelous, SANDER
GUS, false" editorial statements, and
sent his two sons, Allen and Reid
Prewitt, attorneys, to join issue with
Baker.
Arguments Start Today
The papers petition was scheduled
for oral argument at 3 p. m.
The action grew out of editorial
commentaries of conspiracy to
murder cases, resulting from a
spectacular labor war in south
eastern Kentucky coal fields last
spring.
Judge Prewitt cited John T. Mou-
toux, staff correspondent of the
News-Sentinel, for contempt of
court, but dismissed the citation on
Moutoux's assertion that he did not
write the Objectionable editorial.
Although held not in contempt.
Moutoux was barred from the court.
along with Jack Bryan, and Other
News-Sentinel reporters
Meantime, the News-Sentinel
editorially refused any retraction.
declaring the case struck at the
heart of the constitutional right of
freedom of the press-an inter-
probation, incidentally which Judge
Prewitt dismissed as untenable.
Apology Is Refused
Furthermore, because of several
asserted conversations Moutoux had
with member of the prosecution
counsel here, he was ordered to
show cause why he should not be
barred as 'odious" to the prosecu-
ton. He was charged with enter
tanning views identical with those
of his editor, Benton j. Stong.
Moutoux denied making any
published statements derogatory to
the court. Rather, he said, he con-
sidered Judge Prewitt the fairest
juriSt he ever saw in a labor trial.
The court ruled him not in con-
tempt, but reaffirmed its bar of
News Sentinel reporters unless the
demanded and refused apology were
made.
In the appellate court action,
Baker, senior member of the Cleve-
land law firm of Baker, Hostetler,
Sidlo 81 Patterson, specifically will
represent the News Sentinel. Judge
Prewitt will be represented by his
son. Allen. affiliated here with
E. C. NJ. Orear, former county chief
Justice of the Kentucky appellate
court, and Attorney Reid of Mont
eomery county, Mt. Sterling.
Judge Not Present
Judge Prewitt did not expect to
be here for the hearing because of
a court docket crowded with con-
Spiracy to murder cases which cost
his county, he estimated, $500 a day.
Il spent lot of money to edu-
cate my sons to be lawyers" he
said at Mt. Sterling, land they
might as we'll work for me. 1 have
every confidence in their ability"
Judge Prewitt'S major defense of
his banning order, he indicated, will
be simply transcript of the record
of the Moutoux and Bryan proceed
ing in his circuit court at Mt. Ster-
ling, together with copies of the
News Sentinel editorial which he
considers "Scurrilous."