Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-03-08

which
POST TRADERS.
Mr.. Paddock introduced "A bill vesting the
appointment of post traders in the general
commanding the department in which the
posts are situated. Referred to the Commit
lee on Military Affairs.
The Belknap Business.
AN EXCITING DEBATE IN THE HOUSE.
HOUSE-After our report closed
Mr.. Clymer, who had arisen 10 u prl vileged
question In relation TO his being summoned
before the Criminal Court of the District in
the BelkDap case, said that yesterday morn
ing, accompanied by Messrs. Blackburn aud
Robbins OF his committee, he appeared before
The court, and by the permission of the pre-
siding justice he made a statement, and said
that In obedience TO order he appeared to
obey the order OF the court, but as a member
OF the House he wanted To say that in his
opinion IL would be preiu1icial to the inter-
esis of the country TO state what had trans
pired in committee. 1t would close the
mouths OF witnesses, aud would drive them
from the land. He felt that IL was his duty
TO state what had been done in the premises
and that the House should take such action
as was deemed proper.
Mr.. Blaine (Me) wanted to know whether
the court had asked any questions or insisted
upon an answer 10 anything not contained
in that which was made pu bile already. He
could understand that gentlemen might OBJ
ject to detailing the secrets OF a committee
but he could not see the point of delicacy in
the refusal TO state that which was already
history.
Mr.. Clymer said the court did not ask any
questions as TO what was before the commit
tee. 1.-THE court had asked any questions I'm
public they should have refused To answer;
but the party before which the COMMITTEES
was summoned was a grand jury-a portal
with closed doors, and IL IL was known that
the grand jury WIS investigating this M at
ter all witnesses would be driven away. He
could not understand why the gentleman
should ask this question unless he wanted 10
drive witnesses away.
Mr.. Lamar Miss. demanded the rea1ing
OF the subpoena. 1t commanded the chair
man OF the committee to bring all papers,
documents, checks and contracts in the pos
81 ssion of the House, or In possession OF the
Committee on Expenditures of the War de-
partment, as TO the charges against Secre
tsry Belknapl
would have been detrimental to the public
service to testify before the grand jury, aud
he wanted the grand jury TO take the respol-
kibility OF that matter.
Mr.. Danford (Ohiol. a republican member
of the committee, said that he had not re-
ceiyed subpoena. He would ask the chair
man If he had any other testimony than that
which bad been fully reported to the House
and which was now before the country.
Mr.. Lamar objected. No one had a right
TO reveal what took plac in committee.
MI Blaine said no one was asked 10 reveal
that.
Mr.. Clymer trusted Mr.. Lamar would not
insist upon his objection, for he desired to
whole committee was not conversant with.
he would not say this except for the fact
that Others might consider that he had with
held something.
Mr.. Blaine said he did not desire any SEEM
ing division in the political parties as to the
prosecution OF criminals. II has been inti-
pursued a course OF Intimidation. What was
the object of these Investigations IL il was
not TO bring offenders to justice.
Mr.. Clymer said he had not said anything
about intimidation, and the gentleman from
Maine must not impute to him that which
he hac not said.
shall the committee be tnwarted in its efforts
toascertain frauds by the Executive or by
aDyOther authority? The committee should
have the right to bring the President hiIn-
self here IL II desired TO DO so. The President
had said LET no guilty man escape" and
this.
Mr.. Lamar Miss considered the subpoena
issued by the court an outrage upol the
privileges of members. He did not say that
II was prompted by desire TO suppress or To
crush investigation; but what he wanted TO
consider was the question OF parliamentary
privilege, and he wanted the House TO deter
mine whether members were to be compelled
to produce papers and testimony in cases
Mr.. Biaine.-No one presumed to compel
them.
Mr.. Lamar.-It was a violation of priv
ilege TO summon them.
Mr.. Blaine.-No privilege was violated.
Mr.. Lamar.-No privilege violated when
they were asked to produce the records of
this House? Then the court may call pom
any committee to produce its records.
MT. Blaine inquired whether the gentle
country would not see, that the testimony
asked for had already been made public?
And yet this committee goes behind a tech
an obstacle in the way OF the indictment OF
Belknap.
Mr.. Lamar did not see that this was a
mere technical privilege or excuse. The OBJ.
ject seemed to be to close the doors OF the
committee rooms and prevent the prosecu-
ton OF criminals.
Mr.. Blaine argued that the court could not
compel the production OF testimony. The
House was supreme and could refuse any
thing. All that the court asks is the produc-
tion OF such testimony as has been made
public The court demanded this. and he
dared the other side to refuse il. Applause
on the republican side
Mr.. Lamar said no dramatic daring OF the
gentleman from Maine could prevent the
House from exercising its constitutional
rights In this matter. The criminal courJs
could punish offenders, but they dare not Ia
House could impeach the judge who issued
this subpoena. Suppose, In the safe burglary
Gaze, IL was found that the judge mad acted
the theory Of the gentleman from Maine,
from sending for all the papers that would
impiicate him? The House dare do what is
Just; 1t dare do what Is right, and is not TO
Mr. Lamar here offered a long preamble
and resolution, directing that the Commit
tee on Expenditures OF the War Department
dlsobey the mandate Of the grand jury OF the
District OF Columbia until the further order
of the House.
Mr. Kasson said that new, when the exec
utive OF the government IL endeavoring TO
enforce the law, IL Is intimated that he has
interfsred and Ii trying 10 obstruct the course
ofJustice, and gentlemen on the other side
rise and implore the House TO prevent the
prosecution of that criminal. There was no
power that could compel the attendance OF
The committee upon the court. No process
could reach them II they refused. Why, then,
the President arratgned? Was there
ever such proposition ne tn arraign Pres
ident who executes tue laws because he has
ordered the pfcs e ton Of crinainaIs9 Eun