, 1879-04-06

refuse to answer. The statute contemplated :
case where be refuses to signify his willingness
by making 1t known TO the House either by
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
OF by a statement to the officer having him II
charge, and communicating In that way to tht
House his willingness to obey its requirements
i If the party signiied his willingness to the Of
ficer having him in custody, and such Officer
fails to communicate to the House such willing
ness such officer would be guilty ol
a. breach Of official duty, and
| would. be liable. The party ought tc
| have his remedy. What that would be
| it is not necessary for me to determine ut this
| time. I am not now willing to assume that the
| officer would So act. The statute seems to con'
template case OF that kind, because it says,
4.upon signifying bis willingness to obey the
House, he should be returned to the House.
That. being the provision Of the Constitution
AMI tho construction Of the Statute
am not disposed to violate that
| construction. think that disposes
! of the constitutional question raised in the
| warrant in this case where the record shows the
precise questions which we're asked, and "h1ch
the petitioner refused to suswer, and having
feluSCQ, anu on "Iicu L1E dOA5c aA1uAISN oAAA
guilty Of contempt, The warrant
DOES NOT SPECIFY THE QUESTIONS
that we're asked but directs that he shall be
committed uuttl he expresses his will
ingness to answer such questions as
may be required of him BY the House.
II the witness were 70 express a willingness
to answer all questions that were asked him,
then should be inclined to think he would be
entitled at least to be taken to the bar OF the
House, and he would not be liable to any further
Imprisonment unless he should he guilty OF
another contempt, anu unless he IT.
fuses to answer some other qucs-
tions. In case he should express
willingness to answer questions as shown by
the record be would be entitled, 7 think, to be
taken to the bar OF the House. II tue House
were to continue the Imprisonment after the
party had expressed a willingness to answer
any questions that might he put to him, that
would be wrong, and he would have his remedy;
but aln not authorized To discharge person
committed, as this petitioner has been, for con-
tempt ......
yQR ANY TECHNICAL DEFECTS
OF tho warrant II It was all ordinary case,
where he was committed upon all examination,
and there was ! defect in the mittimus, the
Court might make out q proper nlttmus and
rccommit him; but III thiscase don't think the
Judge would have the right to make out
the mittimus to commit this man. 70
EAT the least, this warrant ls somewhat
defective. Il ought to specify the cause OF
commitment, aud ought to specify that he was
committed until he would express Willingness
to answer the questions which were asked him
by The Committee, or br The House, and not to
answer auy such questions as he might be re-
Quired to answer. The General Assembly
would have the right to commit a person Tor
failure to express willingness to answer any
such questions Us might he propounded.
The substance of this case is that he was COM
nitscd for the refusal to answer the precise
questions stated in the record. lie is commit
ted uutil he expresses willingness to answer
those questions. l am disposed to regard him
rs being NOW detained. aud imprisoned for =
fa:iure to answer those questionns that
are asked him,-1hosc specific questions. II 1t
WAS otherwise, aud be mas imprisoned for
failure to answer any such questions as the
Legislature might choose 10 hereafter ask him,
would be disposed to discharge him
TUE PRISONER WILL BE REMANDED.
The decision was general disappointment to the t
audience, who had CAREFUL, followed tie aren-
ncuts for nearly tour hours. lu the delivery |
OF the opinion the Judge Was painfully SLOW, |
and it WAS not until almost through that those |
present began to understand It. 1he managers |
were suprcInely hapny over the result, and no |
doubt resolved in their minds to- be Virtuous |
and happy hereafter. i
CONFIRMATION.
.Sprr'n1 Dslu:ch The I7fb:~A-
CIRCUIT CoUKT ROOM, SPRIN6FIELD, Ill, |
April 5.-Have been held by The Court:
FRANK E. NEvms-
Hutcfdf nsp1tch to Tae Tribune l.
SASGAMoN COUNTY JAIL, SPRNoFrELD, ILL.,, |;
April 5.-Am in favor Of an earl, adjournment!
FRANK E. NEY1Ns.