12 F. Cas. 359 | U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania | 1801
immediately gave an opinion. Each of the judges entered into the history of the trial, pointed out the gross falsities and unprincipled tendency of the publication. They stated, that no manner of doubt existed in their minds, either of the expediency or legality of punishing con-tempts of this nature by attachment; that in doing so, they neither assumed, nor designed to arrogate jurisdiction; they found themselves by their commission and by the laws of the land, in full possession of it, and bound by their paths and the high duties of their official station, to exercise a just and lawful discretion in punishing, and as far as they could, preventing by examples, an abuse, which if not repressed, must overturn the administration of justice. Individually, they disavowed any feelings but those of a desire to discharge their duty. The paper, as far as it reflected on them, (if it meant any reflection,) excited no resentment, They were, indeed, sorry to find that any man should be so lost to decency and truth, as to publish to the world, and in the face of so many witnesses of the falsity, such flagrant calumnies upon the administration of justice. The offence was denominated a contempt of the court; but it did not follow that the judges must be attacked: it was equally a contempt when pending the cause, the party, his witnesses, or the jurors are reflected upon; or indeed, if the publication is only calculated to influence the decision of the controversy; the degree, indeed, may vary. They said, that though they knew nothing of the publication, till brought into court on this motion, they considered the prosecution as a meritorious attention to the true interests of society, and an advancement of justice. As to the manner, and with what moderation they should exercise their powers in case of tue contempt being established, those were matters, about which they were to answer to their consciences and country. Intrusted with the execution of justice and the dearest interests of man, independent of power, and under every moral tie .to perform their duty, they should proceed fearless of calumny, and above influence of any kind; and if it should be found necessary to punish, the degree should be such, as in their best judgments, might serve rather as an example to prevent future offences, than designed essentially to injure the aggressor. — They therefore directed that the rule for an attachment should be made absolute.
