National Republican., 1876-03-25
Congressional Investigation or Inquisition


biel
Congressional II nyestiRation or 1nquisitionsF
1t seems to be the almost unanimous opinion
of the press of the country, without regard to
party, that the many Investigations now in
progress are a damage Gas conducted) rather
than benefit The Indian lpolis Journal, of
March 2l, says:
"If the Investigations were thorough and I'm
partial, if punishment was meted out with stern
justice to all whose guilt vas proved, II would
tend to show the general honesty OF parties, and
have q good influence in purifying the public
service. But there are some further
pollts in connection with these proceedings which
deserve the public confederation.
First is the fact that these Investigations are
OF an unusual character. and are rather inauisi-
toria! than judicial. 1t has heretofore been the
practice in legislative bodies TO require sound.
specific and responsible charges before ordering
an investigation. Some member Of Congress. for
instance, was required to stand in his place and
declare that such and such an otficer, or Depart
ment, or person bad been guilty or was accused
OF such q wrong. and thereupon an investigation
was ordered. But no such proceedings are had
by the present Democratic House of Representa-
tIves. Nobody is specifically accused OF anything.
Nobody assumes the responsibility Of making
chaTges- But numerous committees have had
conferred on them extraordinarJ powers, and
have been given rowing commissions to investt-
gate every body. dTagnet is thrown out. In
the hope OF catching somebody.
1.-THE Journal has no disposition to shield any
dishonest oficer, local or general 1t will de-
maad. as earnestly as say one, the Investigation
ofeyery specific charge of wrong. But It must
condemn this wholesale inqsisition, where nc
body is willing to become responsible for charges,
and nobody is to be held accountable for their
failure.
Another feature Of these proceedings to which
public attention is called is the multiplicity Of
tie rumors Of guilt and the paucity OF the facts
in their support.
"Another point, and by far the grayest In this
discussion is the arbitrary character Of the pro-
ceedings had in these inquisitions. Without
charges being made against any one, without any
specific end to be served, simply to find out If
anybody has done wrong, men are summoned to
answer and produce their books to the committee;
and, upon refusal to comply with such demands,
are imprisoned in the common jail. No proceed
ing more tyrannical was ever had BY the Court
of Star Chamber, In the reign Of the most imperi-
Gus Tudor, than was the imprisonment OF Hal
lett kilbourn. No grand jury would dare re.
port or Judge dare imprison as contumacious
witness under similar circumstances. When
Congress imprisoned a representative of o New
York paper for refusal to disclose the source
outcry was made against the arbitrary sentence.
But here was a specific charge and q spscih, dis
closure required. Not SO In the case Of Rilbourn.
he WAS uUl oVrsTnuaVnt vmesr, he is not ac-
cused Of any otiense against the Government;
no specific charge is made against any one In or
out Of Office. But he is summoned to exhibit
his books, and to disclose names, without any
such charges, and in the face Of his protest
that the Government has no concern in ths
mattIr. The insinuations that the President
would be compromised by the disclosures antici-
pated, or that some other Republican ofhcia!
dares not permit the record to be seen, are as
mean as they are malicious. II any member Of
Congress dares father charge against any officer,
involving peculatlon or fraud, or even specula.
tion at the expense Of the people, let him do so,
then demand an investigation, question Kill
bourn about such specific charges, and If he will
not answer, let him rot for his contumacy. But
70 imprison q free citizen, charged with no
crime, for refusing to exhibit his private
| books, when there is no specification
as 10 how they concern the Government, IS
q high. handed outrage, which, if tolerated By
the American people, may lead to the grayest
results. KIIbourns books may or may not in
plicate some officer In wrong. 1t does not mat
| ter whether they do or not. The question Is not
whether some officer is guilty or not, but this ::
Shall man be imprisoned for refusal TO exhibit
his private papers without any statement OF how
the Government is concerned IN tnems Is o
royirg commission to be given to suspect
| every body, Investigate without charges, and
| imprison such as resist the inquis:tion? Sup
pose that the City Council Of Indianapolis
should appoint O committee to investigate the
management Of the city finances for the last
| dozen years, as suggested by the Sentinel; that
| this committee, In pursuing its Investigations,
| should summon Mr.. William Henderson to ap.
| pear before them, to produce the books and pa
pers of his bank and disclose It's transactions.
No charges s:e made against any oticer, no ale
cation is made that any officer is concerned IN
| the transactions Of the bank, no statement that
| the city has any interest in the books and busi
| ness. But Mr.. Henderson, refusing to produce
his books Ia imprisoned by the council for his con-
| tumacy. What would be the effect on our citi.
Eens: Yet this IS precisely the Washington case.
| No charges have been made in Congress
against any officer, Kilbourn is not asked
| if the name Of any particular oficer appears on
| his books, but merely to see If somebody un.
known may not be involved in unknown wrong,
| this disclosure 10 demanded and imprisonment
| inflicted. We much mistake the temper Of the
| American people and their devotion to the prin-
cples of Justice and personal liberty If these srbi-
| trsry and outrageou proceedings on the part Of
| Congress do not prove an expensive experiment.
| A few more weeks Of Tnyestigations,' resulting
| as they have so far done, and those who have
gotten them up will wish they had not gone into
/ the business"