Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-04-28

| CURED in by the entire law making power.
This proposition invites me, sitting as a
Judge at Chambers, TO pronounce unc0u-
stitutional the solemn legislation of Con-
| gress, in Difference 10 latent power residing
| IN the House, at the request of the House OF
Representatives which pronounced its judg-
| ment Of it's constitutionality by uniting in
| the passage of IL. II reasoning Inclined me
! 10 the conclusion urged, should Hesitate
| long before resolving il into judgment, {. -:
| IL does not. The act does not imply the ab
| negation Of power on the part OF the House
| or OF The Senate 10 infict punishment for
contempt; but on the contrary, recognizes
| that power, ard exercises il in denomina-
ting the ofiense misdemeanOr and punish
| ing IL as such.
Again il is urged, that the penalty of this
| law is cumulative of the punishment, and
| rot substitutional of the law and punish
ment that resided in the House before its
passage. The first answer 10 this 0SittOn is
that there is nothing in the languag e of the
statute or its nature Indicating that the
penalty imposed by IL is 10 operate as an
addition to any penalty that might be in
| iicted by the House for the same offeuse. II
| there was any such purpose, IL is more than
4 doubtful whether the constitution would
| permit IL 10 be exercised. The second clause
| of the 9Th amendment TO the constitution is
| ibis: Nor shall any person DSsubject for
the same ofense D be twice put In Jeopardy
| of life or limb"
II has been attempted to justify this mat
| Ter by the authority that double punishment
| may be inflicted where the act involves two
! ofenseS as in the case of committing a con-
| tempt in the process of committing crime;
| and In the case OF committing, In the same
| act, an Offense against two soveTeignties.
| While this is true, ii constitutes no aid 70
| judgment here, inasmuch as here the Sover-
| eighty is the same, and the offense is the
| same, and that is, contempt.
The offense against the House, and the
ofense involved In the prosecution of the
! indictment being the same, double pun
ishment cannot walt upon IL under the con-
stitutiOn. That the Offense is conclusively
C1e Is made certain by all the documentary
| evidence In the case. We find the otfenSe
| first described In the record of the prOcee1-
| ings OF the committee where 1t occurred as
| follows:
"Q. state whether you have In your pos
session now and nave brought to the COM
| randa, &c, referred TO in the subpoena dttces
| tocUn served upon you? A. have not.
| q. state whether you are prepared To pro
duce them at this sitting of the committee?
| day.
q. State whether you are willing TO pro-
! this committee? A. AS at present advised
! am not prepared.
q. You refuse to produce them before the
| committee In response TO this subpoena? A.
Yes, Sir. 1 would like 10 state the reasons
therefor, &c.
This describes that part of the oGense
| which consisted of the refusal to produce the
| papers. The refusal To answer questions is
described as follows:
go. How many members of the pool were
| there before you became a member? / ne
| lleve you have I'm fact answered. A. Five
gentlemen besides Jay Cooke & Co. put in
| $1,000 apiece.
members reside? A. l do not know that
| could do that. Mr.. Chairman, IL you will
| indulge me, respectfully decline to give
any testimony as IL relates TO these individ-
| uals.
| q. DO You decline to state where they re-
| size? A. l do not know that l could.
could upon reflection, probably.
BY The Chalrman:IQ. Would you refuse
| 10 state If you knew? We want to know
| whether that is one of the questions You de-
| cline TO answer. a. decline 20 answer eX-
| cept upon consultation with my counsel.
By Mr.. New:-Q. For the present you de-
| cline TO state, even If you were certain as 10
| the locality, where they do reside? A. Yes,
| sir; respectfully decline TO state anything
| in relation TO individuals who did business
| with Us, except upon consultation with my
| counsel.
| q. Will you please state their names? A.
| That | beg 10 include in the same answer"
The offence, then, is made up of two
| things-tbe refusal 10 produce the papers,
| and the refusal 10 give the place OF residence
| and the names of the five members OF the
| real estate pool. This offence is again de-
| scribed IN the same words, In the report OF
| the committee to the House; in the proceed
ings OF the House when the relator was
! brought to the bar Of the House TO show
| cause; in the certificate OF the Speaker to
| the district attorney; and in the Indictment
! consented on all sides that the offence is one;
| one act, one fact. But ii is urged, although
1
| in the several forums for distinct purposes;
that the relatOr is punished in the courts in
| the penalty OF transgression; in the House,
to make him testify. In one place to visit
| him with the penalty for what he has done
| or refused 10 do in the other place TO COM
pei him 10 do.
This proposition avows the doctrine that
| in addition TO penalties and punishments
for contempt, the House has the power TO
cOerce the recGsant witness TO testify. This
| power, as distinguishable from penalty, is
IL. 49, n H0a0 NfnnfA Hon, Ia,
terms, either TO courts or legislators; nor is
| IL TO be derived from the spirit OF the Con-
stitution, or found in the genius of our in
so obnoxious to the common law as admin,
/ istered, universally in the courts OF the
| country, that they will not even permit con-
| fession OF guilt unuer duress.
| II by coercion Is meant merely the intiu-
ence that penalty furnishes TO persuade the
| party TO testify, coercion enters into the law
| provided for the punishment, and Congress
| has already provided for IL by law. 1t is
| urged again, that II the power OF the House
OF Representatives is resolved into this law
for the punishment OF contempts, it renders
| the House helpless in the way of enforcing
compliance with its orders TO testify. II this
| be SO the reply is, that Congress is the law
making power OF the country; and II the law
| that they have instituted is inadequate TO
the end, they have the power To maze IL Sc
verer, or if DO law will supply the place OF
| the inherent and underlined authority of
! either House, they have the power TO repeal
| II, and repOssess themselves OF the undehned
authority displaced, or defined by this stat
| ute. The power of punishment under the
statute is not in extinguishment OF the con-
| stitutional right OF punishment for contempt,
| but in definition and expression of It, A re-
| peal of the expression and Limitation of the
| exercise of the power, leaves the subject
| where the statute found IL. With the judg-
ment of the House in contempt, its power TO
| punish terminated, and the punishment pre-
| scribed by law supervened; in pursuance
| OF the authority and command OF the law,
| the Speaker certified the offence TO the Dis
| trict Attorney; and the grand jury found an
Indictment against the relator, which brings
his body within the Jurisdiction of the court
| charged with trying the offence stated, To
which tribunal i feel IL my duty TO deliver
| him for trial.
cannot dismiss the subject without no
ticiDg the fact that the chief labor and learn
| ing expended in the argument before me
with great ability, has been devoted to the
enlightenment OF questions not brought into
| my decision; arguments illustrative OF the
| power, or want OF power, to institute the in
vestigatiOn; the obligation OF the citizen to
bear testimony in such investigation; whe-
| ther the question belongs to the House of
| Representatives or the courts, and whether