—a frequently cited case in support of contempt by publication, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania said the interest in unbiased courts was paramount, that "the streams of justice [must be] clear and pure... If the minds of the public can be prejudiced by such improper publications, before a cause is heard, justice cannot be administered.” ¹¹ In the early 1800s, federal …

—the defendant affixed a writing to a board in the exchange room in the city tavern, reflecting upon the parties to the suit, and the court held that the publication of such a paper prejudiced the public mind in a cause depending in court, and was a contempt.

—the defendant was fined $50 and sent to jail for 30 days for publishing an article reflecting upon one of the parties to a pending cause, which tended to interfere with the course of justice.

—an ignorant and simple minded man made statements that his adversary in a lawsuit, see Bayard & Petit

To the oath filed in the action by Bayard, the publication must necessarily relate; and it made no difference if its tendency was to influence the court rather than the jury. The sole apology 390

As an illustration of this tendency may be mentioned two very interesting cases which occurred shortly after the Revolution, in Pennsylvania, and just after the adoption by that state of the Con-stitution of the United States.

—led Trial of the Judges, which ontains an ex. to an impeachment of the judges of the Su-haustive review of the prior authorities on the preme Court, on which they were acquitted.

Neither the authors of this new legislation, nor the prosecutors of the impeached Judge Peck, disputed the fundamental validity of summary proceedings. 38 punishments.

Enacted in 1835 (Mo. REv. STAT.(1835) p. 160) and modelled upon the contempt statute of New York NY REV. STAT.(1829) part iii, c. iii, tit. 2, art. 1, § 10), the'Missouri statute was one of a series of restrictive acts adopted in the first part of the nineteenth century following disputed exercises of the contempt power by judges in Pennsylvania

—the publication complained of contained no reflection upon the court, but was a libelous charge against the defendants in an action brought by Passmore in the Supreme Court, charging him with having sworn to what was not true in an affidavit.

[BOOK] The Law of Literature: Vol. 2

[PDF] The Judicial Protection of Anti-Judicial Speech Thomas M. Keck Maxwell …

[BOOK] The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania: Life and Law in the Commonwealth, 1684–2017

[BOOK] Repressive Jurisprudence in the Early American Republic: The First Amendment …