National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1875-01-07

had never passed the House. but had simply been
referred to that committee; q resolution, which
had IT been passed, would have authorized the
statements Of Legrand Lockwood. The fourth
was resolution referring to the committee the
testimony In the matter Of the Pacific Mail steam
ship subsidy in the Forty-second Congress, and
the ffth was resolution authorizing the COM
anittee to send for persons and papers, and take
. He was informed that 1t was not the duty of
the Ways and Means Committee TO inquire into
the matter the Pacific Mail subsidy, but to look
to the finances and revenues He had stated that
he had not employed any person subject to the
Jurisdiction Of this House; that he had not paid or
Money to lny Oncer or member Of p this Pa Ouss
So far as he had been personally concerned he
had fully and frankly answered all questions put
ask, as what his salary in California was; what
disposition he had made Of his private funds. So
far as be had been personally connected, he had
answered every question, but to others be had .
duty rs man, rights as q man and privileges as
an American citizen which no power had right
to take from him. No person could be deprived
Of law For authority ior tbs be would refer 70
the Constitution Of the United States. He had
answer; that the whole power Of the Government
would be brought against him to compel him to
answer; In all ages men had been compelled TO
lie by the influence Of torture, but torture never
led to the revelation Of the truth.
HE APPEALED TO THE COMMON SENSE
Of the House in this matter. 1t was now evident
to the committee that the Information sou1ht
would be obtained from other sources, and the
press . mass Of interesting evidence which he was
willing to furnish. Aside from the fact that the
practical good could come from this course.
Mr.. DAWES then offered the following, which
Wa adopted:
person in custody the following questions:
i. Give the names Of persons whom you en-
ployed 10 aid you in procuring subsidy from Con-
paDy.
2. What was the largest sum paid BY you to any
Irwin, who had, with the Sergsantat-A Arms re-
tired to the cloak-room, was brought to the bar
and the questions seyerally put by the Speaker.
the reasons given" To the second he answered !:
MI. DAWES then offered formal resolution,
reeitIng that he had declined to answer, and de-
claripg him to be in contempt OF the House;
which was adopted.
Ways and Means Committee, offered a resolution
in language the sane as that under which Stuart
was committed to the custody of tie Sergeantat-
Arms, to be confined In the
JAIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
until he was ready to appear and make answer to
the questions, and such others as the committee
might legally and justly ask.
MIR. G.. F. HOAX thought the resolution LEFT It
eide when to release the prisoner, aud that the
order Of the House should be more definite.
Mr.. Is said the resolution was the same
as had been adopted In the case Of Stuart, Simon
ton and Walcott.
M GARFIELD said the House was not ex-
ecuting o statute, but holding the man in Gus
tody. The House should act cautiously in the
matter.
Mr.. MAYNARD said he had been informed
by an ofhcer Of the House that In neither eIse
cited had the men been sent to the Jail.
Mr.. DAWES said the Journal stated that they
were. In the case OF WalcOtt he knew It was so,
for he had visited him there several times.
MI. ROBERTS, said both commitment n iafl
geant-at-Arms had been adopted. The commit
tee had thought best to recommend that the
House, and not the Sergeant-at-Arms, designate
the place Of confinement
Mr.. ELDREDGE suggested that the warden
Of the jail might, for want of what he might
properly think good authority, refuse to admit
him.
Mr.. DAWES answered that he could then
bring him back to the House for its further or
deTs.
After considerable further discussion, Mr.,
ROBERTS modified his resolution to meet the
objection as to the Sergeant-at-Arms. haViRg
discretionI ~ power, aud Il was adopted.
The SPEAKER mad read Q section Of the act
in relation to witnesses refusing to testify, which
requires the Speaker Of the House, or the Presi-
dent Of the Senate, to certify the case the Dis
trict attorney OF tn District Of Columbia. and
said that he had not done so in the Stuart case.
which had led TO ZONE criticism, and he now asked
instructions from the House.
After some debate on the subject, covering the
question Of custody between the grand Jury and
the House, the Speaker repeated that he read
the statute as mandatory, and unless otherwise
instructed by the House, he would proceed i'm
mediately to certify the case to the District sttor
ney.
Without taking action IN the matter, the
House, on motion Of Mr.. GARFIELD, at Ass
D. m, adjourned.