Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/641

IM BS CABY. 629 ���NOTE. �CoNTEMPT. A contempt is a wilful disregard, disturbance of, or disobe- dieiice to.the rules or orders of a judicial or legislative body ;(a) and it may be committed either in the presence of the court or body, or in its absence. If com- mitted in its presence, it is a direct contempt; and if committed by oflScers of the court elsewhere tban directly in its presence, it may be considered done in the presence of the court ;(6) but if done by others than officers of the court and beyond its actual presence, it is a constructive contempt. (e) The main distinction lies in the mode of redress. In the case of a direct contempt the court may punish summarily by a fine, or the alternative of imprisonment; but in case of a constructive contempt the party in contempt muat be brought in by attachment, as final judgment thereon cannot be rendered without an opportnnity for a hearing.(d) In either case it is in the nature of a criminal action,(e) a quasi crime in rem,(f) a specifie criminal offence, and the imposition of a fine is a judgment in a criminal case,{,g') which the court bas no power to vary after expiration of the term,(A) nor is the proceeding reviewable on ap- peal.(i) When theoffence is committed not in thepresenceof the court, itmust be judicially establi8hed,{j) and the party ean be arrested at any time when found within the jurisdiction of the court.(A;) The attachment for a contempt is a criminal proeedure,(i) in which the party must appear in person and not by attorney,(m) and he has no right to a trial by jury.(7i) The party charged may beamerced or discharged ;(o) whence it results that a commitment in contempt is a commitment in exeeution,(p) and the party committed cannot be bailed,(c) though the practice as to bail is otherwise in England,(i') owing probably to the prerogatives of the peerage. For disobedience of an order of court the party may be committed till he obeys ;(s) and a witness ref using to answer �(a) Anderson T. Dnnn, 6 Wheat. 2M. (l) Hnmmell's Case, 9 Watts, 421 ; Cartwright's �0>) People V. Wilson, 64 III. 195 ; Stuuit T. Peo- Case, 114 Mass. 230. �pie, 4 111.395. (m) People v. Wilson, 64 m. 195; Vertner v. �(c) Whitten V. State, 36 Inci. 196. Martin, 10 Smedes & M. 103; Ex parte Hamilton, �(d) Ex parte Kilgore, 3 Tex. Ct. Ap. 247. See SI Ala. 66. �McConnell v. State, 46 Ind. 298; Whitten v. State, (n) Holllngawurth v. Dnane, Wall. Sr. 77. Se» �36 Ind. 196 j Ex parte Wiley, Id. 528. Resp v. Oswald, 1 Dali. 319 ; State t. Doty, 32 N. �(e)U. S. V. Wayne, Wall. Sr. 131; Ex parte J. L. 403; State v. Mattliews,37 N.H. 460; Patrick �Kearney, 7 Wheat. 38; Wilson T. State, 57 Ind. 71; t. Warner, 4 Paige, 397; People v. Bennett, Id. �People V. Craft, 7 Palge, 325 ; Whitten v. State, 36 282 ; Neel y. State, 4 Eag. 259 ; Ex parte Grace, 12 �Ind. 1%; Crook v. People, 16 111, 531; Pitt T. lowa, 20S. �Davisoii, :i7 N. Y. 235; Crosby's Case, 3 Wils. 188. (o) State y. Tipling, 1 Blackf. 166; Matter of �(/) Siiite V. Tipling, 1 Blackl. 317; Ex parte Stephens, 1 Ga. 584. �Smith, 28 Ind. 47 ; Clark t. People, 1 Breese, 266. (>,) Kearney's Case, 7 Wheat. 38 ; Crosby's Case, �See Stiite v. People, 4 III. 395 : People v. Turner, 1 3 Wils. 199. �Cal. 152; Ex parte Adams, 26 Miss. 883 ; Gorham (?) Ex parte Aloxander, 2 Am. L. Reg. 44. See �T. Lnckett, 6 B. Mon. 6^; Watson v. Williams, Crosby's Case, 3 Wils. 193. �36 Miss. 331 ; In re Moore, 63 N. C. 397. (r) Rex v. Lord Preston, 1 Salk. 278; Rex T. �(«•) Fischer v. Hayes, 6 Fed. Rep. 63; S. C. 102 Davis, 2 S.ilk. 608; Chamber's Case, Cro. Car. �U. S. 121 ; Ex parte Crittenden, 7 Pac.C. L. 1. 483. 133. �(A) Fischer V. Hayes, 6 Fed. Rep. 63; Ex pane («) Tome's Appeal, 50Pa.St. 285; In re Mnt.L. �Crittenden, 7 Pac. O. L. J. 483 Ins. Co. 17 Bank. Reg. 368 ; Bridges v. Sheldon, 18 �(t) Hiiyes V. Fischer, 102 U. S. 121; S. C. 6 Fed. Blatchf. 507 ; Vose v. Trustees, etc., 2 Woods. 647 ; �Rep. 63. Ex parte Graham, 3 Wash. C. C. 456; Souter t. �(» Anderson T. Knox Connty, 70 III. 65; In re La Crosse R.R.lWooIw. 80. SeeFlsclierv.Hays, �Coopcr, 32 Vt. 2S3 ; State v. Woodfln, 5 Ired. 199; 102U. S. 121; S. C. 6 Fed. Hep. 63;Taylor T.M<f. �R«i V. Almon. Wilmot, 263. fett, 2 Blatchf. 305; Reg. v. Wilkinson, 41 Up, �(k) Buvvery Bank T. Richards, 3 Hun. 366. Can. Q. B. 44; Ex parte Jones, 13 Ves. Jr. 237; ��� �