Legal Opinion

Respublica v. Passmore

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 15, 1802PublishedCited by 7 opinions

The interrogatories having been filed in the prothonotary’s office, the defendant answered them in substance as follows upon his oath : He believed that there was no suit depending on the 8th September last, and referred to the records. He denied that he had the most distant intention to prejudice the public mind in his favour, “ or to treat with disrespect “the judicial authority of his country, for which he had always “ entertained the highest respect.

Read the full summary

The interrogatories having been filed in the prothonotary’s office, the defendant answered them in substance as follows upon his oath : He believed that there was no suit depending on the 8th September last, and referred to the records. He denied that he had the most distant intention to prejudice the public mind in his favour, “ or to treat with disrespect “the judicial authority of his country, for which he had always “ entertained the highest respect. He felt much irritated when “ he first saw the exceptions, and in the moment of his heat and “passion, published the expressions he…

1Opinion of the CourtShippen, C. J.

However libellous the publication complained of may be, we have no cognizance of it in this summary mode, unless it be a contempt of the court. 2 Atky. 469. But we are unanimously* of opinion, that in point of law it is such a contempt, and readily concur with Lord Hardwicice, that “ there “ cannot be any thing of greater consequence than to keep the “streams of justice clear and pure, that parties may proceed “with safety, both to themselves and their characters.” Ib. 471. If the minds of the public can be prejudiced by such improper publications, before a cause is heard, justice cannot be…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. State ex inf. Crow v. ShepherdSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  2. State v. Frew & HartWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Territory v. MurrayMontana Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Contempt v. HughesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Duffy v. Village of Norwood, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County1894

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API