New-York tribune., 1876-05-30
mr. N4VY INVESTIGATION.


The House Naval Committee seems 10 be IN
some doubt whether it il conducting pIblic
examination of the official behavior Of Nr
Robson or a private one. Theoretically the
sessions OF the Committee are private, and OF
n large part of the testimony collected by 1t
during its three months of work the country
has no knowledge whatever. But great deal
OF evidence unfav"roiio to Mr.. Robe
son has been made public, and the
details of the remarkable information
obtained by the Committee on the sub
icct OF the dealings of the Catteis with
naval contractors are as well known as if they
had been given in open court. Mr.. Robson
therefore has a show of right in demanding
that he shall have an opportunity TO reply " IN
"opcn session" 10 the charges and insinul-
tions made against him, and when the Com
mitteo declines to throw open its doors Tor
this purpose it exposes itself to the suspicion
of unfairness and Injuries in advance the elect
of its fnal report.
Nevertheless there il an Obvious incOnven-
icnce in adopting the course wE.ch Mr.. Robe
son insists upon. Only u fragment of the
testimony has been published, and he requires
on ia part that the Committee shall now open
iis cntiro budget for his inspection. and let
him give the defense publicity which has
not been permitted tho accusation. If we
allow secret inquiries at al-and where
criminal action is suspected they seem to
he ruavodalle-the Committee must have
the privilege of keeping its doors closed
until its work is finished Nor in the
ease of Mr.. RobesOn need any hardship
be imposed by this rule. He knows what has
tl,..I Ifat
tells, and he is able to give the Committee his
cyTlanation without any further formatics.
If there were any disposition on the part oi
Mr. Whitthome and his Democratic colleagues
10 keep Mr. Robson in the dark rs to the nature
o. lhe suspicious against him, ia it 20 be sup
posed that the Republican members OF the
Committee would suffer such an outrage IN
tilen.c7 and if Mr. RobesOn wishes his
answer to 20 promptly before tho world it is
cay enough for him to publish it, Publicity
is not obtained by letting n few spectators into
the examination room, but by printing the
proceedings in the newspapers; and If Mr.
Robceon wishes to give his answer to the
press, what is to hinder him
rhe difficulty in this case has arisen from
the uniustiiable action OF tho Committee, or
come one connected with it, in allowing frag-
mcntdry reports OF testimony TO BIO prema-
turaly published. IL would appear that in
| their deli ;ht ut having "caught Robson ut
"lasth some Of the members were unable to
restrain themselves, aud fell into an indscre-
ton which they already SEQ cause To regret.
Their partisanship contrasts strongly With
/ The course of the Foreign Affairs Com
mittee in the investigation of the Schenck
scandal. That inquiry WAS conducted with
judicial implItiaiity. IL was, indeed, allowed
10 take altogether too wide IA range, and con-
sumo too much time, but Schenck, Park Stew
art, and their associates, received every
consideration. MI the witnesses they suggested
were called. Their counsel had full liberty of
| cross-e1aminatlon. AT their request the inyes-
tigation was carried into remote collateral
branches. The result was a report i'll which
the Committee unanimously concurred, which
the country approves without dissenting
voice, and which falls upon all tho persons
implicated in the Emma Mine affair with ab-
| solRtely crushing weight. If Mr. WhitthOrne
! hopes to accomplish something similar by his
inquiry he must alter his methods Of proceed
ing.