Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1940-10-22
Newspaper Comment
Case Placed Before
Supreme Court
Arguments Completed
BY Los Angeles Times and
Stote Of California

The extent of a newspapers right
to comment editorially on court
case prior TO final settlement was
before the Supreme Court today for
decision, following the conclusion
of arguments yesterday on an APP
peal by the Los Angeles Times from
a contempt of court conviction
growing out of the publication Of
editorials concerning two labor cases
and woman politician.
The case was based on the fol-
lowing editorials: "Sitdown Strikers
Convicted" published December 81,
1887, dealing with the conviction
but before sentence of sitdown
strikers at the Douglas Aircraft Co.
plant: The Fall of an Ex-Queen,"
published after the conviction on
bride solicitation charges Of Mrs.
Helen Werner, former Los Angeles
political figure, and probation for
Gorillas," printed May S. 1888, OPP
posing probation for two unionists
convicted of labor violence.
The California State Supreme
Court upheld the Superior Court
conviction in the case, four justices
approving the conviction and two
dissenting.
Conflicting Contentious.
T. B. Cosgrove, attorney for the
newspaper, contended that a con-
tempt conviction was proper only If
there was "a clear and present
danger that editorials would in
terefere with the administration OF
justice.
Allen w. Ashburn replied for the
State of California that the proper
test was whether there was "a rea-
sonable tendency" TO impede the
work of the courts.
He asserted that this test had
been Gin operation for 200 years or
more" and had been sustained by the
Supreme Court. He contended also
that the conviction of the newspaper
was proper under either tests.
Pressed by Justice Stone for
specific statement of his views on a
newspapers right to comment on
pending litigation, Mr.. Cosgrove
replied:
Whatever is said and wherever
it is said the question always is:
Were the words used, under the
circumstances of the case. OF such
nature as to create a clear and
present danger that they would
bring about a substantial inter-
ference with the orderly admin
istration of Justice. Unless they do,
they are privileged under the Con-
stitution."
Justice McReynelds Comments.
He added that we do not think
We are privileged under the Con-
stitution to influence the court"
Justice McReynolds commented
that what might interfere with one
Judge might not have the slightest
influence on another
That is one of the objections to
the reasonable tendency test" Mr..
Cosgrove replied
Mr. Ashburn said an appalling
situation had existed in Los Angeles
because of the trial of cases in
newspapers and over the radio" He
asserted that the Los Angeles Times
had got beyond all bounds"
| Concluding arguments also were
| heard on the conviction of Harry
Bridges, West Coast C. I. o. leader
on contempt charge. He was al
legged to have sent to Secretary OF
LABOR Perkins telegram, subse-
quently published, criticizing deci-
/ sion by the Los Angeles Superior
| Court.
Mr.. Ashburn urged that the con-
viction be sustained Mr. Bridge s
attorney. who argued last Friday
I commended the labor leaders tele-
gram was within his right Of peti
I ton to the Government.