retion. The offence may be tried
summarily, or may be prosecuted on information or on indictment as was
done in the case of the _Weekly Dispatch_ already mentioned. The
prerogative of pardon extends to all contempts of court which are dealt
with by a sentence of clearly punitive character; but it is doubtful
whether it extends to committals for disobedience to orders made in aid
of the execution of a civil judgment.

Contempt is usually dealt with summarily by the court contemned in the
case of contempt _in facie curiae_. The offender may be instantly
apprehended and without further proof or examination fined or sent to
prison. In the case of other contempts the High Court not only can deal
with contempts affecting itself, but can also intervene summarily to
protect inferior courts from contempts. This jurisdiction was asserted
and exercised in the Moat Farm case (1903) and the _South Wales Post_
case (1905) already mentioned.

Except in cases of contempt _in facie curiae_ evidence on oath as to the
alleged contempt must be laid before the court, and application made for
the "committal" or "attachment" of the offender. The differences between
the two modes are technical rather than substantial.

The procedure for dealing with contempt of court varies somewhat
according as the contempt consists in disobeying an order of the High
Court made in a civil cause, or consists in interference with the course
of justice by persons not present in court nor parties to the cause. In
the first class of cases the court proceeds by order of committal or
giving leave to issue writ of attachment. In either case the person said
to be in contempt must have full notice of the proposed motion and of
the grounds on which he is said to be in contempt; and the rules
regulating such proceedings must be strictly complied with (_R._ v.
_Tuck_, 1906, 2 Ch. 692). In proceedings on the crown side of the king's
bench division it is still usual to apply in the first place for a rule
nisi for leave to attach the alleged offender who is given an
opportunity of explaining, excusing or justifying the incriminated acts.
It is essential that before punishment the alleged offender should have
had full notice as to the specific offence charged and opportunity of
answering to it. The king's bench procedure is that generally used for
interference with the due course of criminal justice or disobedience to
prerogative writs such as _mandamus_.

An order of com