Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1859-12-29
COMPULSORY TESTIMONY.

The approaching investigation into the af-
fair at Harper's Ferry, authorized by the Sen
ate, has called attention to the severe law I'M
der which witnesses are compelled to testify.
In 1857, when Congress was very much ex-
cited over the contumacy of Mr.. Simonton,
the correspondent of the New York Times
the following bill was reported, and speedily,
and almost unanimously, enacted
''Any person summoned as witness by the
authority of either house of Congress, to give
testimony, or to produce papers, upon any
matter before either house, or any committee
of either house OF Congress, who shall wilful
ly make default, or who appearing, shall re-
fuse to answer any question pertinent to the
matter of inquiry before the house or commit
tee by which he shall be examined, shall, in
addition to the pains and penalties, now exist
ing, be liable to an Indictment as and for a
misdemeanor in any court of the United States
having jurisdiction thereof and on conviction
shall pay fine not exceeding $1,000, and not
less than 500, and suffer Imprisonment in the
common Jail not less than one month nor
more than twelve months"
The second section provides that no person
who shall be thus examined shall be held to
answer criminally, in any court of JUS
tice, for any fact concerning which he
shall testify, and that no witness shall be
allowed to refuse to testify for the reason
that his testimony would disgrace him,
or otherwise render him infamous. The
third section provides for bringing cases
of refusal to testify to the notice of the District
Attorney and the Grand Jury.
1t will be readily seen that such a law, in
the hands of fanatical and prejudiced COM
mittee, may be made an instrument of the
most atrocious oppression. A witness may
have come into the possession of facts, volun-
tarily or involuntarily, to which no Court in
the land could compel him TO testify; but
Congress demolishes the right reserved to
every witness by the common law, or subjects
him to heavy Judicial penalties. Ifthe witness
chooses to crininate himself, relying upon the
assurance that he will be protected from Grim
nal prosecution, what will prevent Virginia or
any other state from avaling itself of the
testimony there ELECTED for the purposes of q
prosecution, upon the ground that Congress
has no jurisdiction of the state courts-a posi-
ton which would be undoubtedly sustained
by the Supreme Court The law was made
to meet special case, but applies, with mani
fest injustice, to great variety of cases never
contemplated by those who framed it.
Moreover this law is at war with the fifth
amendment of the federal constitution, which
provides that no person shall be compelled, in
any criminal case, to be "a witness against
himself" The meaning is that he shall have
a right to withhold anything which can be
used any where to convict him of crime ANY
witness may refuse to divulge what will ''crim-
mate himself" and the constitution forbids the
use of any compulsion whatever to make him
speak. That act of Congress over-rides this
provision of the fundamental law, and tram
pies down an important safeguard of personal
right It'should be denounced, exeerated, and
made imperative by public sentiment. 1t was
passed without proper consideration, to meet
Simonton's case. In the House there were
only twelve votes against it and only three
senators voted nay, to wit: John p. Hale,
Henry Wilson, and Mr. Pugh of Ohio. Mr..
Sumner was absent.