Snyder v. State

• Decision Date: 14 December 1898
• Docket Number: 18,734
• Citation: 52 N.E. 152,151 Ind. 553
• Parties: Snyder et al. v. The State
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

52 N.E. 152

151 Ind. 553

Snyder et al. v. The State

No. 18,734

Supreme Court of Indiana

December 14, 1898

From the Benton Circuit Court.

Reversed.

Charles M. Snyder and Daniel Fraser, for appellants.

Howard J. Hackney, J., did not participate in this decision.

OPINION

Howard, J.

This was a proceeding for contempt of court, growing out of the facts and proceedings in the case of Saunderson v State, ante, 550. The proceedings in the case at bar were based upon a statement made and filed in the Benton Circuit Court by the judge of that court. From this statement it appears that on April 29, 1898, during a court day, the judge left the court for a short time to visit a sick friend and while so absent was informed by the court bailiff that the attorneys wanted him at the court house; that thereupon he returned, "and, finding no one in the court room proper, was told by the bailiff that the attorneys were in the room adjoining, generally used for the consultation of attorneys, and, in case a special judge is trying a cause in the court room, is also used to try causes before the regular judge, and in hearing reports and probate matters." The statement further shows that in this room the judge, on entering, found the appellants and six others who had participated in the preparation of certain resolutions adopted in vacation of court, February 19, 1898, being the same resolutions referred to in the case of Saunderson v. State, supra. With the purpose to restore good feeling between the judge and the attorneys, and prevent further publication of said resolutions, the judge had theretofore presented to said attorneys a statement which he asked them to sign and make a part of the records of the court. When the judge entered the room on this occasion, as so invited through the bailiff, he found the attorneys talking over his written proposal "and, instead of assenting thereto, it was asserted, in an angry and contentious manner, by some of said eight persons, and not rebuked by the others, that the resolutions were right, that they spoke the truth, that the publication" was right, etc., using, also, certain disrespectful language to the judge; that "the bailiff was not present, and the court merely said to them, 'You are wrong and unfair to the judge, and the court offered to retire, but was requested to remain and hear the matter." The statement further shows that the meeting was organized and...