OCR Text |
Show " . Jl f y ' - . ; I Tlie Idaho Supreme Cour : J The Idaho Supremo C6ur" hasiendered decision de-cision in the case qs the Boise ( JapitPl Kews, its editor and one of its stockholdei s, io is said to have been the dictator of the po 'jfcy- of the paper during the recent campaign, inf which the individuals indivi-duals were fined and sentenced to ten days in jail. The action of the court is the result of an attack on it by the paper because of the court's decision in the matter of thcr Roosevelt presidential presi-dential electors, preventing thiV names from being be-ing printed on the official bollot. A number of other newspapers are indulging in caustic criticism of the court's action. Prom inent among them being the - Herald-Republican and the Tribune of Salt Lako City. The first named paper is particularly bitter, and well may it bo, for it has been but about two years since the editorial writer of "that paper, its business manager and one of its reporters were fined for contempt of the United States District Court, and there is now an appeal lying in the files of the State Supreme Court from a decision of the District Dis-trict Court of Salt Lake county, in which the paper was fined and its manager fined and sentenced sent-enced to thirty days in jail .for contempt of court. The course pursued by thii Herald-Republican at that time was most despicable, It could not find words to express, its denunciation of Judge Lewis, who rendered the decision, the attack made on the judge being such a piece of villany as to merit a greater penalty than the court inflicted , ; With its experience 'with. the Federal Court still fresh in the mind of it's inahaghfent and with another contempt case awaiting decision, it is playing a fine game at attempting to bring the Idaho court into disrepute,' hoping-that by so doing its own ase may be. minimized in the local court. " 'i The Idaho paper did not criticise the court because of any delay in rendering decisions, nor because of any of its decisions Jin any public or private case that had ever corn before it for determination, de-termination, but, for political reasons only,made a vicious attack on the court, supplementing its own opinions by a letter from Theodore Roosevelt denouncing de-nouncing the court fdr its decisi in in the elector-ial elector-ial matter. Its attack amounted to a public arraignment of . the court, with! charges of dis- tion and collusTon It did not attempt togive the court'sreasons for its decision, but1 gave its own views, according to its own interpretation, pn the question before the court, in every' way contriv- ing to bring the court into disrepute. S We can see no grevious error on- the part of the court in either instance. - |