In the case of Rouse v. Whited, 25 N. Y. 174, it was held that if the defendant's oral admissions are put in evidence, he is entitled to have the entire statement taken together, to the extent of all that was said by the same person in the same conversation that would in any way explain or qualify the portion adduced against him, but no further.In this case, the rule of evidence, in respect to parts of the same conversation, laid down in the Queen's Case, (2 Brad. & Bing. 627), disapproved, and that in Prince v. Samo, (7 Ad. & Ell. 627), approved, and the same case 25 Barb. N. Y. 279 was reversed. See also 45 N. Y. 340; 78 Id. 103; 87 Id. 512; 92 Id. 284; 47 Id. 83 ; 2 Duer, N. Y. 26.
CONTEMPT.Courts have an inherent power to punish all persons for contempt of their rules and orders, for disobeying their process, and for disturbing them in their proceedings. 5 Ired. N. C. 199; 8 Coke, 38b; 11 Coke, 43b; 37 N. H. 450; 25 Miss. 883. As to the extent of the court's power to punish for contempt, see Ex parte Terry, 128 U. S. 40 (L. ed.) As to contempt for publishmg an article concerning case on trial, see 44 L. R. A. 159. Charging judges with dishonorable conduct in pending case. 50 L. R. A. 195. By refusal to testify, 13 L. R. A. 66; 28 Id. 242. As to contempt in violating decree for abatement of nuisance, see 11 L. R. A. 804. Violation of injunction, 8 L. R. A. 589. By disobeying void injunction, 48 L. R. A. 824.