King v. Reading

5 Del. 399

• Court: Superior Court of Delaware
• Decided: July 5, 1852
• Status: Published

Opinion

Judge Harrington

said he thought the rule should be in a different

form; as to show cause why the justice should not be ordered to take the security, and on his refusing to do so, an attachment for contempt might issue; but whatever the form of the rule, he thought, if the magistrate by affidavit, positively denied the matters charged by complainant’s affidavit, the summary proceeding ought to be dismissed, and the parties remitted to their action against him, or indictment.

Booth, for the rule. Bayard, contra.

He had doubted the power to attach for official misconduct, but the authority of Bacon seemed to be in favor of such power, as existing in the King’s Bench; founded it may be in the idea that the mal practice of such inferior tribunals, acting under the supervision of that court, was a contempt of its authority, as the court having general supervision of the administration of justice.

Rule discharged.