1788.
Bryan, Justice. I still fay, that not having heard what has been offered in extenuation of the offences, I am incompetent to join in any opinion respecting the punishment. I cannot surely be suspected of partiality to libellers: I have had my share of their malevolence. But, it is true, I have not suffered much; for these trifles do not wrankle in my mind.
The Chief Justice pronounced the judgment of the court in the following words:
M'Kean, C.J.—Eleazer Oswald: Having yesterday considered the charge against you, we were unanimously of opinion, that it amounted to a contempt of the court. Some doubts were suggested, whether, even a contempt of the court. Some doubts were suggested, whether, even a contempt of the court, was punishable by attachment: but, not only my brethren and myself, but, likewise all the judges of England, think that without this power no court could possibly exist;—nay, that no contempt could, indeed, be committed against us, we should be so truly contemptible. The law upon the subject is of immemorial antiquity; and there is not any period when it can be said to have ceased, or discontinued. On this point, therefore, we entertain no doubt.
But some difficulty has arisen with respect to our sentence; for, on the one hand, we have been informed of your circumstances, and on the other, we have feen your conduct: your circumstances are small, but your offence is great and persisted in. Since, however, the question seems to resolve itself into this, whether you shall bend to the law, or the law shall bend to you, it is our duty to determine that the former shall be on the case.
Upon the whole, therefore, the Court pronounce this sentence:—That you pay a fine of 10l. to the Commonwealth; that you be imprisoned for the space of one month, that is, from the 15th day of July to the 15th day of August next; and, afterwards, till the fine and costs are paid.—Sheriff he is in your custody.[1]Lesher
- ↑ The sentence, on the point imprisonment, was entered upon the record for the space of one month, without taking notice of the explanatory words used by the Court. At the expiration of the legal month, (28 days) Mr. Oswald demanded his discharge; but with this the Sheriff, who had heard the sentence pronounced, refused to complete 'till he had consulted the Chief Justice. His Honor, remembering the meaning and words of the Court, told this officer, at first, that he was bound to detain his prisoner 'till the morning of the 15th of August, but having shortly afterwards examined the record, he wrote to the Sheriff, that Mr. Oswald, agreeably to the entry there, was entitled to his discharge.
On the 5th of September 1788, Mr. Oswald presented a memorial to the General Assembly, in which he stated the proceedings against him, complained of the decision of three of the Judges of the Court, in the principal case, and of the direction of the Chief Justice to the Sheriff, by which, he alledged, his confinement had afterwards been illegally protracted:—finally calling upon the house to determine, "whether the Judges did not infringe the constitution in direct term in the sen-
