Evening star., 1953-09-11
Free Speech in Virqinio

FTee 0PeeCn IN Virginia
The decision of the Virginia Supreme
Court reversing the contempt conviction of the
Rev. Ross Allen Weston, Arlington pastor is
an important and welcome vindication of the
right of free speech, including the right to
criticize Judge. 1t is not an occasion, how
ever, for unreStrained rejoicing.
Mr. Westons conviction was based on
sermon in which he criticized ruling by Judge
Walter T. Mccarthy that certain Federal en-
ployes were disqualified for service on the
Arlington County Board. 1t was sermon that
was both shallow and offensive. But it was
not sermon which, by any reasonable test,
could be said to constitute a clear and present
danger to the administration of justice. And
since this Is the only basis on which finding
OF contempt should be permitted to stand the
unanimous Supreme Court decision overruling
the conviction of Mr. Weston by Judge J. Hume
Taylor, who had been brought in to try the
case, is most gratifying.
This sense of qualification Is tempered
however by reservations in the language used
by the Supreme Court The tribunal held that
while the things Mr.. Weston said may have
been on the "borderline" of contempt, I'VE
cannot say that beyond reasonable doubt it
(his language) oversteps the line and j.. {. con-
stitutes contempt" Then, the court contin-
ued I'VE are not impressed with the argument
that because Of the constitutional guarantee
of freedom Of speech and press the State Is
without power to punish in a contempt pro-
ceedng unwarranted and improper criticism
Of judicial conduct In litigation which has been
terminated 80"
Thus, while clearing Mr. Weston on the
facts of this particular case, the court seems
to say that, in other circumstances, person
is liable to punishment for contempt If he
ind hon of q nff
the case has been concluded. This is reserva-
ton to be viewed with concern. For it appears
to leave in Virginia, a murky area in which
"unwarranted and improper criticism" what
ever these words may mean, can be punished
in contempt proceeding, although the United
States Supreme Court has held that before
such criticism can be punished by contempt
proceedings it must immediately imperil' the
administration of justice. In other words, the
test imposed by the Virginia court may prove
to be narrower and less liberal than that
decreed by the highest court.
Qualification over Mr.. Weston's exonera-
ton should also be tempered for another and
quite different reason. Commenting on the
ruling, he said that the Virginia Supreme Court
decision "is especially gratifying in these days
of fear and hysteria." Then he added: Il do
not regret having preached the sermon at all"
It seems to The Star that Mr.. Weston, even
though cleared Of contempt, should deeply
regret having preached the sermon.
In the first place. the correctness of the
ruling by Judge Mccarthy, which Mr. Weston
condemned, was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
In the second place, it was sermon filled with
scurrilous implications-a sermon which pro-
fessed not to question Judge McCarthys integ-
rity while proceeding to question it by innuendo.
The following passage from the sermon
will serve as illustration:
Finally and most important of all, we
must be alert to the encroachmentS on the
freedom of persons. The stealth, the intrigue.
and the wicked designs of the illiberal
are a constant menace. They leap at us
from the left waving the most impressive
anti-FasciSt banners. or they creep upon us
from the right, clothed in the most innocent
garbs. Sometimes these forces are clothed
in the gowns of the justices of the law. I
refer. of course. to Judge Mccarthy and his
recent decision in the Dean case that employees
of the Federal Government cannot hold ONCE
in Arlington County -"
If this claptrap meant anything, it must
have been intended to link Judge Mccarthy
and his decison-a decision subsequently ap-
proved by the Supreme Court-with the con-
slant menace" deriving from "the stealth,
intrigue and wicked designs of the illlberal."
This is the rankest sort of nonsense, and Mr..
Weston, in The Stars opinion, should not only
regret having preached the sermon; he should
be thoroughly ashamed of it, Furthermore, II
he is concerned about "these days Of fear and
hysteria," he should give some serious thought
to the extent to which sermons such as his are
calculated to foster fear and hySteria.
In a word, it is gratifying that Mr.. Weston's
right to criticize has been upheld. But graft
f1cation should go hand in hand with an aware
ness that the proper exercise of the right to
criticize-especially to criticize judge-is not
separable from sense of responsibility. Legiu-
mate criticism is not the same thing as sheer
abuse, and while even the latter may not be
punishable as contempt, responsible critic
will refrain from indulging in it.
Bridge Imposse
Noticeably absent from the Highway De-
partment's estimates for fiscal 1855 was any
request for funds with which to plan an E