CONTEMPT OF COURT is a wilful disobedience of the rules, orders, or process of a court of law, or a distorbance of or interference with its pro ceedings. Contempts by resistance to the process of a court, such as the refusal of a sheriff to return a writ, or wilful disobedience of a rule or order, such as the non-payment of money, or the non-execution of a deed ; or interference with the proceedings of a court, such as a comment upon an action pending which is calculated to pervert the course of justice, are punishable by attachment. But contempts committed in the presence of a court of record, such as a wilful obstruction of the proceedings, or insolent conduct or demeanour, may be punished by the judge forthwith either by fining the offender or committing him to prison.
Disobedience of an order of Court is perhaps the most common form of contempt, arising most frequently where a party is ordered under the DEBTORS ACT (q.v.) to pay a debt, or is ordered to pay over money which he holds as a trustee, or to execute a deed of conveyance in an action for specific performance of a contract for sale. This power of attachment is necessarily inherent in a superior court of law, for otherwise it would often be impossible for the judgments or orders of the Court to be enforced.
Contemrt in the form of comment by third parties upon a periling action is not by any means unknown in these days of personal journalism, though the cases that have been brought befoug the coipls have not bean very numerous. Contempt of this nature goes perilously near an infraction of the criminal law, it being an indictable offence to write and publish any thing which is calculated to pervert the course of justice ; only recently an editor and his reporter were each imprisoned for publishing the results of their independent investigations into a crime the trial of 11;hichswas at the time pending, and which publications were held to inflame and prejudice the public against the accused. But to return to civil contempt, it has been laid down by Lord Ilardwicke that even if there is no misrepresentation of facts, and the Court is spoken of with great respect, such a colourable com ment will no' impose upon the Court. There cannot be anything of greater consequence than to keep the streams of justice clear and pure, so that parties may proceed with their action with safety both to themselves and their ammeters. It is accordingly a contempt of court to abuse parties
who are concerned in pending actions, or generally to prejudice the public against them before the action is heard. Lord Romilly has adverted to this subject in the following terms :— " The principle is quite established in all these cases that no person must do anything with a view to pervert the sources of justice or the proper slow of justice ; in fact, they ought not to make any publications, or to write anything, which would induce the Court, or which might possibly induce the Court or the jury, the tribunal that will have to try the matter, to come to any conclusht other than that which is to be derived from the evidence in the cause between the parties ; and certainly they ought not to prejudice the minds of the public beforehand by mentioning circumstances relating to the case." word, in its most extensive signification, com prises all commerce carried on against the laws of a state ; hut it is applied more particularly to contraventions of revenue laws which prohibit or restrict the importation of foreign merchandise. Such a particular contra vention is popularly called smuggling ; the name contraband is applied, however, to mercl_andise itself when made the subject of SMUGGLING (q.v.). Up to so recent a period as the last generation, the practice of smuggling was one very universally approved by the popular mind, not withstanding the existence of the personal danger by which it was attended, and the fact that the law constituted it an offence punishable most severely. The reason for this sympathetic view probably lay in the fact that the general public had an instinctive dislike to governmental interference with, and restriction of trade, and had moreover a more or less ignorant prejudice against taxation—especially when it was levied directly upon commodities for the most part used as food. To-day, however, public sentiment has changed, and this change, together with the remarkable vigilance of the customs authorities, has practically put an end to smuggling as a form of trade in itself. But there still exists the occasional amateur smuggler, the child of modern facility for foreign travel, who never feels that his foreign journey has been a complete success unless he has smuggled, or attempted to smuggle, a few unsmokable cigars, or other articles of a similar character. See CUSTOMS.