OCR Text |
Show 404 APPENDIX. court. of the United States had power and jurisdiction io decide what llcts constitu tc a contempt at,.ain t ·t t 1 . ' ' · . o' s I.; ·o c ctcnmnc whether the petitioner lJacl been gutlty of contempt; and to inflict upon hilll the punl· ·hmeJ1t 1 . l . h.· . . } W llC l lll Is opmw~ lC ought to suffer. If we fully belicYcd the petitioner to 1 . llO Cent-1fwe · . . t} )eltl- '\H'Ie sure lat the court 'rhich convidecl h' . _, the f t · . •m m1sunuerstood ~c s, or misapplied the law- still we could not rcf'xamine th .. , or rC'Jndo-e the · t' f 1 e ev1ucnce 1- t'l JUS tee o t le case, without g rossly disregurdino- what . \.now to be the b.w of the lm d Tl . l b ' "o . . ' 1 . le JUC ge of the district court decided the quet:.t10n on Ius own constitutional re ponsibilit)' E ·n _, to have acted t)·I·ann·c· ll · von J 1e coulu be shown I ,l Y or corruptly h ld only in the cnate of tl U . l S ' e cou 0 e called to answer for it 1e mteC!. tatcs. But the counsel for the petitioner o b l . d was con,·icted and . r l g e 1111 the proceeding in which he ' aigue t lat the sentence for t . . the court bad no · · c1· . con cmpt 1s VOid, because . ' JUns wtJOn of a certain other tt . l . . . tJgating or attmnpt' t . . ma er w uch lt was mvcs- ' mg o mvestigate when tl \Vc find u J·udt"meut a . t 11 . . ' le contempt was committed. o < gams 1m 1n one c , d 1 . another, in which there . . d asc, ,m 1C complams about Is no Jll gment lie . iT . ngainst the Uuited St·lt . . 1 h , . . lS su ermg for an ofl'ence ' es ' cln ( c s 'l rs h . particular individu·:tl II . , . '. . c J. mnocent of any wrong to a ' · e 1s conclusrvcly ·1dJ.udg d .1 he tell · us that the c t 1 _, . . . •. • e gu1 ty of contempt; and our lau no JUn -d1ct10 t . . . 1\ It must ue rememuercd tl , t n o I estoi e 1r. '\Vheclrr's slayc fence. It is . ·1 d 1.,t contempt of court is a specific eriminal of-pum: s le sometimes by indictment d . . mary proceeding as it , . . h. ' an sometimes 111 a sum- . ' Wtts m t IS case. In either d f .·, . . cat10n against the ofii d . . . mo e o tual the acljud1- cn er IS a convictwn a d tl . . consequence is execntr·Oll (7 , .Vh ' 'n le commitment Jn · " eat 38 ) Th · · bclieye has never been d bt d C . . . lS IS well settled, and I on e . crtamly the 1 d petitioner have not denied. .t l'h carne counsel for the 1 • c contempt b particular cause or it 111 • • • may e connected with some ' ay consis t m nusbehavio 1 . h h ob trn r t the admini.;;tration of . . · · ' r w uc as a tendency to . JUStice generally \Vh .t . . . a pcndmg cause the pi·occcd· t . . . en I IS commttted m ' ' mo- o pnmsh t · · . not entitled in the cause pend~no- b . 1 IS a ~n~ceedmg by itself. It is The record . . o' ut on the crnnmal side. ('\Vall. 134.) of a convrctJOn for con tern t is . . under investigation when ·t . . p as distmct from the matter . ' I w.tscommittecl asanind· Is, from the cause in which the f· I· l ' ' lctment for perjury · a sc oat 1 " ·as tal c VIcted of perjury ask us to dcli·,·ct· hi·m ' {Cn. an a person con-th ·tt the oath h" from the p em· te nb·a ry, on showino- • on w Ich the I>erJ· Ul')' I·s ""s· d h l · 1 · '~·' · 1 w llc (J'n e was t k · l the court had uo J·urisclict· ' 'l·v o ' , a en 111 a cause of · Ion · t ould an · d · wealth listen to. uch a reason f t. t' Y JU gc In the common. · or 1 ea mg the sen te · of swearing falsely, he refuses to be sw . nee as VOid? If, instead Oln at all, and he is convicted, not APPT:NDIX. 405 of perjury, but of contempt, the same rule applies, and with a force precisely equal. If it ue r eally trnc that no contempt can be committed against a court while it is nquiring into matter ucyond its jmisdiction, and if the fact was so in this case, then the pctitiom'r httcl a. good dcfellCC', a ucl ho ought to have made it on hi:-; trial. To make it after conviction is too late. To make it here is to proclnce it before ihc wro11g tribunal. Every judgment MUST hr conclusive until reversed. 'uch is the character, nature, and esscn<·e of all jmlgnwnts. If it bt' not conclusive, it is not a jndgmcut. A court must either have powpr to st'ttlc a giren question finally and forever, so as to prctlude all further iHquiry upon it, or else it has no power to m ake any derision at all. To say that a court may determine a. matter, and that another court may r egard the matter afterward as open and undetermined, is an absurdity in terms. It is most especially ncer. sary that convictions for c<mtempt in our courts should be final, c011 •lusiYr, and free from l'C'<'xamination l)y ollH'r courts on habeas co1pus . If the law wrrc not so, our judicial !:;ystcrn wonlcl brc•ak to pic'ces in a month. Court:o; totally uncom1ret('d with each other would be coming in constan t collision . The inferior courts would r cYi~e all the decisions of the judges plaeecl over and above them. A party unwilling to be tried in this court, need only defy our authority, ~mel if we comntit him, take out his lwbf'aS rrnjJUS before an as!-lociatc judge of his own choosing-, o.nd if that judge is of opiuion that we ought not to try him, there is 1m end of the case. The doctrine is so plainly against the r eason of the thing, that it would be wonderful, indeed, if any authority for it could hr found in the bool.;s, except the overruled decision of l\lr. Jn~tice Spencer of New York, already referred to, and somr ('(forts of the same kind to control the other court" made by Sir Edward Coke, in the I\ing's B nch, which arc now nniven-;ally admittN1 to h aYe bern illegal, as wrll as rude and in trrnperate. On t1H' other hand, we have all the English judgrs, :mel all our own, disebiming their power to interfere with or eontrol OlH' anothrr in this way. I will c<mtent my. elf by simply r rf'rrring to s01-r1c of the books in which it is e: tablished, that the conviction of contempt is a separate procrcding, :mel is conclusive or every faC't whic·h might ha,·c been urg-ed on the trial for colltcmpt, :mel among others waul ofjurisdiction to try the cause in which the contempt was committed. (I John . l{ep. :32,), l't SNJU. The opinion or Chief J11. tice K ent, on pages 370 to 37-5. 6 .Joh ns. ;)0.1. 9 Johns. 12:3. 1 Ilill. 170. f> Iredell, 100. lb. 1:53. 9 Sanclf. 72·1. 1 Carter, 160. 1 Bla<:l,.f. 166. 25 Miss. 83G. 2 \Vhcclcr's Criminal Cases, p. 1. HAd. nncl Ellis, |