, 1865-02-10
From Our Own Correspondent
=, SPRINGFIELD, Feb. s, 1865.
'TuE CONTEMPT CASE"

~ N%@~S -
city, the respected States Attorney, who
was committed BY the Honse Of Reprcsen-
tatlvcs 1or contempt, in refusing to answer
certain questions ptopuundcd to him by the
renitentiary Committee, on the ground Of
i.'o' LIS pr;avileges Is IN attorney. has excited
men; AS have already informed YOU, h1r.
Keed, after lis commitment, applied to the
Judges of the Supreme Court for writ Of
hEbcas corpus to secure his discharge. He
appeared yesterday before Chief Justice
WaiGeIagd Judge lawrence; with Hon: jack
G. Conkling appeared on behalf Of the Peni-
tentIa1y Committee. Mr.. Reed stated his
cGsc to the court, and the points at issue
were discussed By the opposite counsel. After
taking The matter under consideration for a
short time, Chief Justice Walker delivered
the united opinion of the court. As this de-
cision opens new aud "a ost important cru in
caEcs Of this description, and is adverse to
the heretofore generally recognized opinion
OF lawyers, send Jou the points delivered
by the distinguished Chief Justice, as fol-
lows:
After consideration Of the case, we hold,
powers Clearly erntsd to it By The G Constitution,
has the undoubted right to summons and compel
thc attendance Of witnesses at It's bar or befoEets
ID That the power to Summon and examine
Witncsses implies the power to compel thcll to
,g1vc testimony By committing for contempt in
'ase they refnse to testify. Otherwise the arst-
named power would be nugatory-
5u: 1he House Ind the power to decide the
2uesaon Of contempt and having decided 1t, and
ne petitioner and tho subject matter Of the alle:-
e. contempt beng both within It's jurisdiction, We
aaxe no p4wcr to rc-cxamine its decision. Should
enfa sa,, e. nrneh Of the Legislature imprisoa per-
eGn LOT 70 aaa aeged c9ntept the sabect ncr
S:1amris, 5: ctitissism upon them fn new !paoer,
Il Mo9la 10 oe ne ne duty Of the courts to furnish
peIxon aha ,nG sa61eet matter within their IN
r1soicnoo, 1nelr oeucn Ia NECESSARILY final The
action Of an inferior court In euch case Eou1d h
final, and for FAR stronger rea.on we shnnfd hnli
final the action Of Coordinate brauch of the
GoycFnment. haf'ns complete Jurisdiction IN tho
18th. The record In this case shows that TIM nett.
tfouer was In attendance a witness, and refused
do 20 would he lEeaeh Of professions, eonddeuce e.
rcposeH in him as an attorney. lie h4s bern rnr
mitted by tnc House for period less than twenty
four hours, with order that he he, at ihc expfa-
tion OF his term OF confinement, brought asnin to
- Ne do rot decide whether Section IS, Art J. of
The Copet1tution limits the power Of the House to
commi;ments for the term Of twenty -ton5 years or
this case that the order under which the petitioner
Is now restrained of his liberty Il to expire within
III period md clearly does not violate that pro-
vision Of the Constitution. a eontnmacious "it-
Imprisoned for ut least tWcnty -four years, and tts
az often ne the contempt Is REPEATED.
We therefore remand the prisoner to I4a Gus
tody oflhe door-keeper Of the House Of Repre-
improper for rs to remark that We presume rem
our personal knowledge Of the ch2tacter OF ".
Reed tlat he has been Sot e1ned IN tAls mht1ar py
what he deems bis professional obligations bit
the House having, IN the exercise Of its Eighttnl
authority, determined what questions must be an
swcxed, NC do no. think 1t Inconsistent With Ills