Evening star., 1944-05-02
laughIin Contempt
Case TO Delay Sedition
Trial Several Days
BY CARTER BROOKE JONES.

TWO weeks OF futile prellminarieS
today was delayed several days
more when Justice Jennings
Bailey deferred until 10 am
Thursday a hearing on a con
tempt charge against James J
Laughlin, a defense attorney.
The delay was to enable Mr.
Laughlin to prepare his defense tt
the citation, which charges hin
with "scurrilous" attacks on Chic
Justice Edward C. Eicher, presiding
at the sedition trial.
Mr.. Laughlin had asked a week
to get ready for the contempt hear,
ing. Justice Bailey reset the matter
for Thursday after ascertaining
during brief recess, that Justice
Eicher would not continue the sedi-
tion trial until the Laughlin charge
was disposed of.
Before adjourning the hearing
Justice Bailey held that Mr.. Laugh
lin was not entitled to a jury under
the circumstances alleged In the
contempt petition brought by the
sedition prosecution
New Jury Panel Called.
The sedition trial had been con-
tinued from yesterday until tomor-
row when Justice Eicher set the
contempt case for hearing before
Justice Bailey today. But now the
main trial will be delayed until
Justice Bailey decides whether Mr.
Laughlin is guilty of contempt.
The work of selecting jury
which had to start at the begin
ming after the old venire was dis
missed yesterday because the court
term was ending. probably will be
delayed until next Monday.
The. small courtroom of Justice
Bailey, on the second floor of the
old Courthouse, was filled, largely
with lawyers and members of the
press, when the contempt case was
called.
Mr.. Laughlin said he would de-
fend- himself, but received permis-
sion to have two other defense coun-
sci in the sedition case seated beside
him. They are Henry j. Klein, rep
resenting Eugene N. Sanctuary, and
William j. Powers, attorney for Will
liam Dudley Pelley, former leader of
the Silver Shirts.
Justice Bailey said he had read
the petition filed by o. John Rogge
and Joseph w. Burns, prosecutors
from the Justice Department.
Laughlin Asks for Time.
Mr.. Laughlin then asked for time
to prepare his defense.
II was served with these papers
about 9 o'clock Saturday night" he
explained, land couldn't really do
any work on the matter until yes
terday. 1t will be necessary for me
to interview certain witnesses, and
I haven't had time"
Mr.. Burns, whom Justice Eicher
designated to represent him at the
proceedings, said it was up to Mr..
Laughlin to show why he required
more time. The contempt citation,
Mr.. Burns pointed out, was based
largely on the record in the pending
case. -,4 .~@ /. .sus 4
These newspaper publications, !"
Justice Bailey interviewed, ARE not
records Ts*
The court referred to published
interviews with the accused defense
attorney. These, together with mo-
tions and affidavits which Mr.
Laughlin filed in the course of the
sedition trial, were the Govern
ment's exhibits in the contempt
citation.
The trial of the sedition case,
Mr.. Burns added, lis being held
up by the alleged contemptuous
conduct of one of the attorneys" {"
IT do not believe it can go on
until it is decided whether the court
can proceed against any further
instances of such conduct"
Bar Would Probe Situation.
Meanwhile, the District Bar AS
sociation prepared to look into the
" lAIlOul
ing any names or making any
charges, 26 leading members of the
local bar petitioned the organiza-
tons Board of Directors to hold a
special meeting for the purpose of
taking cognizance of the situation
and such action as may result from
said meeting pertaining to the So
called sedition trial"
The petition was made public by
F. Regis Noel, past president of
the association. He pointed out that
it bore more than enough signatures
to require the special meeting under
the bylaws.
In letter accompanying the petit
ton MIR Noel wrote: IF there is
any organization in the District of
Columbia, indeed in the country,
which should take notice of this
matter, it is the Bar Association of
the District"
On the eve of the contempt hear
ing, Mr.. Laughlin said he was not
in the least fearful of its outcome. -
He charged that it constituted "a
serious threat and is of vital con-
Germ TO all defendants in this case -
The attorney maintained that he
was we'll within his rights in making
the assertions complained Of in mo-
tions to disqualify Justice Eicher.
Some of the other defense attor-
neys met with Mr.. Laughlin after
adjournment Of the trial yesterday
to help map his defense. 1t was
considered likely that Mr.. Laughlin
would demand jury trial, although
the prosecution contended no such
right is given defendant in con-
tempt case. Indications were that a
number of defense counsel would
attempt TO intervene in the pro-
ceeding.
Macmillan J. st. George OF de-
fense counsel, who was fined $40 by
Justice Eicher yesterday for con-
tempt in open court, issued a state
ment defending himself. Mr.. St
George. who was fined for continu-
ing TO speak after the court told hin
he was out of order and to sit down
pointed out that he had been prac-
tlcing law 36 years and it was the
first time such a thing had hap
pened to him.