, 1879-04-06

i =
over to Monday morning, II, In the meantime
the gentlemen representing the respouden l!
would consent to Dir. Neyins' reIease on bal
during that time. This WIS refused og I'M
| House managers.
Mr.. Palmer then stated that he would pro
| coed, but would expect thnt no limitation o.
| placed on bis time in presenting his case. Tx
began his argument BY referring to the thret
independent branches OF the State Government
and read that portion Of the Constitution whlct
gives the branches Of the Legislature power t
vs. The People, in 8 Scammon, as illustrating
the construction of the Constitution as being
limitation Of power. Therefore, then the Leg
islature is permitted to punish for contempt an1
person not member who shall be guilty ol
| disorderly or conlemptuous conduct 10 its pres
eDce for period
| NOT EXCEEDING TWEETT-FOUR HOURS.
Any attempt to exceed that power must be void.
| He then read at length from the statute gov
| erning the practice under habeas corpus pro-
ceedings, and followed this by reading the war
rant OF commitment. This warrant, be said.
the Court would observe was absolutely limit
! less sentence. The statute specifying the man
ner in which the Legislature shall proceed IN
| natters OF contempt appeared to give some
authority Tor q warrant like this. But this
statute must be read IN connection with t4e
! Constitution on this poiut, and ne illustrated
] this principle OF construction BY Supreme Court
| decisions. Hence, I writ drawn as this was, and
which IN effect commits the witness TIL ad-
journmcnt Of the Legislature, vas Toid, and
| 1t is in violation of the Constitution. He then
| read the resolution Of the House to the Door
keeper, directing him
TO HOLD THE WITNESS -
uutfl ne should signify his willingness to the
| Doorkeeper or Sheriff to answer CERTAIN ques-
| tions, and inquired il any Court (and tire House
| claims this to be judicial Druceeding] could
! OF another until he should do some act which it
| belonged to the Court alone to d. le in-
sisted that this was the effect
OF this warrant, and that the House
had turned the matter overt to the Doorkeepcr.
He wos to take the duties OF tile Houae, aud
mold the witness IN confinement until he would
answer the Doorkccper's questions. Counsel
then read Secs To II of the law regarding
Legislative contempt, and said that the opposl-
tion claimed that the tenth section permitted OF
believed that the House had no power to
prolong an Imprisonment for more than twenty
four hours, unless the witness persisted III his
contumacy, and further, the House had no
keeper or Sheriff. It was enough that the
House could commit the citizen, but it was
asking too much that the House could transmit
Its own power to an outsider. PersistencY OF
contempt is III: only cause for which con-
tinuance Of Imprisonment may be made. Tic
continuance can onlJ be determined by the
House, not By Doorkecpe1 Or Sheriff. The
warrant directs that he be imprisoned
UNTIL he CONSENTS TO OBEY,
but this must be coupled with the limitation of
twenty-four hours Neither the DoorlseeDcr nor
the Sheriff find any signs ur repentance, and
hence, according to tic warrant they may keep
him III custody until the adjournment of the
House, and counsel stated that tbs Legislature
has made arrangements to star all summer
Mr. Palmer sIateI that the commitment was III
s,. .afi inn ff't tury hnnaff tfr Nnvf
jail to remain there until he was willing to ar-
swcr all questions :i'at might be pronounded to
him This is ar absurdity, because The House
has no right. to ask for an; thing more
than Ncvius had already refused to answcr,
IN other words, Nevius must part With every
right as ctizeu before he tan gc: out OF jail.
That is the pledge the House wishes to exact in
its Judgment, which is
SHAMEFUL VIOLATION OF THE LAW
and Constitution.
point made by counsel was constitutional one,
and it well taken settled the case The second
was the validity Of the ju lgment OF the
House, aud this was outside !!e jursdic-
ton Of the Court: The two sections
do not go together they are separate
und distinct, and must be SO regarded. Thu
term OF Imprisonment eon.inues just so long as
the person III eontasnpt persists in it. The law
does not require 1he House to visit the Jail to
ascertain II Mr.. Ncyus be willing TO answer tie
questions. II he be ready to do so he can notify
the House just Us lie would the Court. If the
Legislature las Jurisdiction over the subject
matter, and the body OF the witness, its action
cannot be reviewed by any court. Right or |
wrong, the Judgment must Stand. The !
warrant was in strict nceotdaucc with the iutltr-
mcnt Of the House. To corroborate this asser-
ton, Mr.. Jones cited u.e case Of Charles Fl. !
Reed, in which the Supreme Court decided ad- |
Vcrselv to that gentleman in case somewhat |
similar to that Of Neyns. Hc also referred to |
tile Paine case, in which Paine declined to AL |
swcr at an investigation Of an alleged printing I
corpus was denied by Judge Zane. The i.egis- |
lalure bad the same power in contempt cases a5 |
the court, aud it need not be- conferred BY the |
Constitution. !
MASON, OF cooK,
after disclaiming any personal feelings on the
part OF the House, was OF the opinion that |
Nevins committed himself to jnil. He pleads |
his professional honor. a1d for that tie Socaker
respected him, und were he in Nevins: place he |
would do the same thing, and would stay IL
professional honor stands between his freedom
aud an Investigation of serious charge pre-
tcrred aganst member OF the House. Are the
peoples Representatives to remain under ccud /
The members Of the Legislature are at bis mer-
cy, for he only has the kcy By which the door
now conceallng the guilty Representative NAV
be opened. He hoped the contumacious Wit
HESS Wplt atslllu committed u0Lll he elail
choose to diYulge the knowledge sought for.
COLLINS, OF COOK,
advanced nothing new except to fGthom the in
tcutons Of the trainers Of the Constitution. I
What he thought about them was not Gerv
clear. Hu referred to Blackstone, and then said
that Neyins WAS his own jailer.
ATToRNET-GENERAL EDsALL
contrasted the contempt sections Of the Consti-
tutions Of l54S and 1870. IN the former it was
provided that the prisoner must be brought bc-
fore the Bar Of the House every twenty-four
hours. The Inconvenience OF the provision was
so obvious that it was modified by liie later
Constitution. Under the old Constitution the
observation-disclosures to sit on Sunday to com
ply with the law in dealing with contempt
cases. Mr. Edsall tthcn went on to show
that under tile present Constitution this
power Of the Legislature has been enlarged. In
these contempt cases the rclator was committed
till he elected to comply with the demands Of !
the House aud in strict compliance with the
Constitution. Mr.. Edsal1 then proceeded to 20
over the ground covered By the other members
Of the inquistion, and concluded with the hone
that the Court would consider the matteg.as a
res adjudieatd-
MR.. PALMER
said that in concluding bis argument he would
confine himself to the point whether Legisla-