Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 24.pdf/617

 572

The Green Bag

article, and sentenced him on Oct. 12 to pay a fine of $500 or serve ten days in jail. The article in question was one of two appearing in the Atlanta Constitution, and in it Judge Fite commented on one of the decisions as follows: "It is the most dangerous decision ever rendered by any court, at any time, anywhere, under any circumstances." The higher court," he said, "should at once recon sider and recall this decision, and if they refuse to do so the Legislature should give the people the chance to abolish the court, which they would certainly do. "No wonder," he adds, "the people are losing faith in some of our reviewing courts." At the hearing Judge Fite through his counsel denied that he had meant to reflect upon the honest purpose or integrity of the court. He sought to explain what he meant by charging the court with "pitiable misconception of the record," with having "reversed the Su preme Court with great complacency," and with "responsibility for recent law lessness at Plainville"; and, further, with believing that a twenty years' sen tence was too heavy for a negro charged with an attempted assault on the humble wife of a farmer, and, finally with having said, "No wonder our people are losing faith in some of our reviewing courts." Judge Hill, in announcing the decision, said that the Court had given careful consideration to the question of its authority to issue the rule, and decided that it had the authority. The Court insisted that the letter of Judge Fite threatened the judges with a judicial recall unless their decision was reversed. The Court also declared that the asser tions were gross and inflammatory libels; that if the Court did not punish such aspersions it would forfeit the respect of the public. To say that the judge did

not intend to render a proper decision was a contemptuous utterance as was the statement that the Court of Appeals frequently reversed the Supreme Court. This is the second case on record in England or America ~where an inferior court judge has been haled before the bar of a superior court and punished for contempt. The only other case on record is that of Judge Breen.of Nevada, which came up in 1908. Conceding that some of the language used by Judge Fite in his comments on the Court of Appeals may have been in poor taste, it may be doubted whether the utterance tended to belittle or ob struct the administration of justice. We can hardly consider the punishment of a nisi prius judge for contempt under such circumstances to have been effec tual in maintaining the dignity of the higher tribunal. If sixteen years' ex perience on the bench will not teach a judge moderation of speech and a proper regard for judicial etiquette, it seems rather late in the day to attempt to train him in new habits.

MONKEYING WITH SCRIPTURE Deceived from Columbus, Ohio: "The J.. Ward brothers, or half brothers, Benjamin and William, were charged with killing a colored woman in this baili wick nearly thirty years ago and were duly indicted for murder in the first degree. Under the pauper act, separate counsel were assigned by the court to defend them. "The prosecutor elected to try Ben first. The younger brother turned state's evidence and his testimony was very damaging to the defense of his brother on trial, whose counsel were Judge W. R. R in his prime one of the greatest natural lawyers Central Ohio has ever had — and his Junior E. C. B.,