Evening star., 1941-10-15
High Court Considers
Newspaper Contempt
Case Second Time
Los Angeles Times
California Conviction
Reurgued on Appeal

The question of newspapers
right to comment on a court action
after jury has reached its verdict
is under consideration once more
by the Supreme Court.
Raised by the contempt convic-
ton of the Los Angeles Times in
the California courts, the issue was
reargued yesterday before the Su-
preme Court, which heard the case
year ago, but was unable to reach
conclusion.
At issue are editorials praising
a jury verdict against % SitdoWn
strikers, another asserting that a
trial judge would make a serious
mistake" If he granted probation
applications of two men convicted
of assaults on non-union workers
and a third discussing political
'bossiSm" after conviction of
woman politician in an attempted
bribery case.
The newspaper and L. D. Hotch-
kiss. its managing editor, were con-
victed of contempt by the Los
Angeles Superior Court on the
grouhd that such editorials might
affect judicial consideration of
pending motions for new trials or
applications for probation. The
appellants contended yesterday
through Attorney T. B. Cosgrove
that all the cases had reached
finality when the juries acted.
Calls Comment Proper.
Comment after the verdict, Mr..
Cosgrove said, was "a proper exer-
else of free speech and free press"
as guaranteed by the Constitution.
He argued that in each instance
the editorials were addressed to the
newspapers readers, and not to the
courts, and that there was no evi-
dence the judges were influenced
or that there was clear and pres
ent danger" of their being influ-
enced by the comments.
Allen AShburn. counsel for the
California courts, asserted that it
was enough to show that there was
"a reasonable tendency" to affect
further action in the case. the "rea-
sonable tendency" rule being his
toric in its application"
The California courts, he asserted,
took cognizance of the Times DOW
er in Los Angeles and its circula-
ton in the Los Angeles area, to-
gether with the likelihood that the
newspaper would reach the courts.
Mr.. Ashburn added that the Cali
fornia courts found that the state
mentS in the editorials were in
tended to sway the courts or en-
barraSs the decisions of the judges,
and he added that a reversal of
the convictions would be equivalent
to terming the lower courts pro-
ceedings as sham" proceedings.
Holds Paper Responsible.
"a newspaper cannot do what it
pleases and say We didn't know it
was going to affect the case" he
declared
Mr. Cosgrove criticized the in
definiteneSs" if the reasonable
tendency doctrine in determining
whether an editorial was in con-
tempt.
There should be a test sufficiently
explicit that the average citizen may
know when he is liable to a penalty
for an expression, and not be left
guessing, he continued.
This tendency to influence rule
lacks certainty.
IF a citizen, be he minister, pro-
fessor or newspaper editor, is not
at liberty to express his opinion
freely without fear, we have censor
ship" he added.
Along with the Los Angeles Times
case, the Supreme Court has under
consideration the appeal of Harry
Bridges, West Coast C. 1. o. leader.
from a contempt conviction growing
out Of publication of a telegram he
sent Secretary of Labor Perkins as
sailing a California court ruling in
injunction proceedings. This case
was reargued Monday, having been
tied up with the newspaper litigation
for the past year.