Arkansas true Democrat., 1858-03-09

pay, or promise to pay, directly or indirectly any money or pecuniarv consideration to anv oihcer or member of any Congress for his vote or services Tn the passage of, or to influence his aT''on h relation to the tariff or any other law.
 NOT ald ever give any money Or securities to "ay person Tor the purpose of being paid to any oincer or member of Congress for his vote or influence directly or indirectly, upon any act under the consideration of Congress Nor have any knowledge that such act or thing was done by any other person.
 am adVlSed by my counsel, Messrs Reverdv oohilSon and James M. Keitt whose opn,ion nave ootalned since the present question was P'"pouhded to me, that the above answer is a run answer to everything which such question may ihEoVe, lalllhg under the judriSdlction of the rouse or Representative touching the in- qu'y "hlch the committee are constituted. and 0ouiu ohIy De constituted, to investigate: and "O'iii2 under the same legal advice most re- 'Peo'luily submit that the question in it's pre- se' form Is not of itself ''pe,tnent' to the only i"luiry winch the House Ill this instance has a regal right to Institute. If, acting under such a power, committee, or the House. can compel a wltuesS to answer such question as this, except " saying that he dld not use at all, directly or 'hnlrectiy, any money coming from any quarter u lhllGehce, directly or indirectly, the action or vote ot any member of Congress, and thai he haS never pad any money to any one for such a purpose, and has no knowledge that any mo- ney was uSel for that purpose or any other ille- gal purpose, regarding Congress or any of it's officers -l respectfully submit that it gives to the committee or the House the right to inquire into my private business and social relations winch, except so far as they may tend to prove the alleged improper influencing of members of Congress n some official duty, Is as much be- yond>the jurisdiction of the House. and. of course, of the committee as 1t would be beyond ther power to investigate the private business and soclal relations of auv other citizen. with out such charge or implication of corruption. or attempt to corrupt Congress, or any of its members having been made
 J. W. WOLCOTT.
 Washington, D. C., Feb. Il, 1858.
 Tour committee having heretofore had evi. dence that the firm of Lawrence, Stone & Co. had earl y m March, l957 paid to the said John w. Walcott the sum of S50,OOO in two pav- ments one of S33, ,OOO, and the other of S25.- uOO, which constituted a part of the charge of S0nOoO, which appeared from the books of Lawrence Stone & Co.,, and to have been ex pended in procuring the passage of the tariff of loo' believe It very material and important to the eiucldation of the matter referred to them to know from Mr. Wolcott whether he admit, the receipt of any such sum; and, if so, how it was expended, that the House and the country may judge whether it was designed to influence the ieSlSlalo ion of Congress or not
 Your committee therefore, recommend the adoption of the following resolutions:
 Resoived, Thal the Speaker be, and heis here by authorized and required to issue his war rant to the Sergeant-at Arms of this House. commanding him to arrest the said John W. Woicott, wheresover he may be found. and have his body at the bar of the House forth with to answer as for contempt in refusing to answer proper question propounded to him by a select c mn-tee of this House in pursuance of the authority conferred by the House upon said committee
 Mir. STANTON said, so far as the investiga ton had proceeded, 1t appeared that S59, 600 of the SohOOO hal gone into the hands of Mr. W olcott Upon inquiry as to whether he had rece Ved that money or not, the witness had feiused to give proper answer. He believed It Indispensable for the House to know whether or lot t'e House Was influenced by the eXpen. diture oI this money. They had right to HnoW how this disbursement had been mad. nat Was the sole inquiry, and the simple oues- ion was for the House to determine whether they had right to demand an answer to the question: II he received It, to whom and for what purpose 1t was pad? If they had not the power to compel the witness to answer this oues- uon, they had better be disbanded at once They asked the House to confer this power upon them, that they ght perform their duty.
 Mir. UNpERWOOD, of Kentucky, hoped that the question might be passed over intor- maily to-day to come up pto-morow, when they would be better prepared to consider it.
 Mr. PHILLIPS, of Pennsylvania, thoughtit was time for the House to es ablsh some rule by which they should be governed, or they must abandon the investigation. It WAS time now thit they should have power to compel d re factory witness to disclose testimony. The question which had been propounded to the witness was eminently proper, aud he would ask If any gentleman, whether lawyer or not, woull stand up and allow a witness to substitute his own jud Jment for that of the committee. It was the duty of the House to clothc the com mlttee with all the powers of the fonse to com pei hm to answer the questions categoricaliy.
 NIT. PURNIANCE, of Penrsvlvauia. said tue wi.nesS hal obsJinately refused to answer. ant It would be liIe to ask d sacond question: | appeared that S5S GOO was pad tn this man, and he refused to testify a, to the manner in winch he had d.sbursed 1t. The House had a right 10 know whether he had dsDurscd it, and the names oi the parties who had received i
 NJ. MAY NARD O, Tennessee, asked but dld hot receive consent tp submit d motion that the report oi the committee b. printed, ald its further consideration be postponed uuui some hour 10 mprrow
 MT. REAGAN, of Texas, sad th5 case pre- Sehted TO ie-a question of privilege to excuse the W,iess rom answering the ints,lo'4s pro tou dcd ,o hjm by the comm tee The wit hess had hot even answered the question pro- Polnded ty tae comm ttee, but had replied 10 d 7e.i's oi questions never propoud d to him uy iht committee. II ne deslrta to f'lY upon the Sfon>d tha, hs a..o,.er m .hi cr.mi4.to h.m- sell let Giln maNe mat point
 Mr. JOHN COChRANE, of New York. thought the issue had becu tairy decided by the witness. He had teniered his answer under a,- vice of course and declined to answer a sim pie, direct question. IL was uow for the House to determine whether under these circumstan- ces, they would accept the answer. Under these clfcnmstanceS he thought 1t was unwlse-nay, more, all idi5nity the House to delay its action. he lime hid arrived when 1t was in- cumbent upon the House to exercise its authori- ty. It Was immaterial whether the question was proper or improper; it was propouudcd uli- der the authority of the House by the commit tee, and 1t was not for the witness to take the position that, in his opinion. it was improper. The question Was clearly a proper and pertinent one, and the witness should at once be summon ed before the House and the question propouud- ed to him.
 Mr. SEWARD, of Georgia, said he knew nothng about the witness and cared litte but the laws of the country ought to be respected, and the House should not, because they posses sed the arbitrary power, exercise it. He con tended that the witness had not been guilty of 
 MT. STEPHENS of Georgia, thought that the witness should be made to answer. He would have him brought up, and, if he refused to answer, he would have him imprisoned.
 MT. BOWIE, of Mary land, argued that the witness had not been guilty of contempt, and that the proceeding was all Infringement upon the rights of citizens
 Mir. MOORE, of Alabama, sent to the clerks desk the following res tuition. which was read