New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-01-12
IN FAVOR OF COUNSELMAN
HIS REFUSAL TO ANSWER UPHELD
JUDGE GREsHiM'S DKCIIoN REVERSED BY TIL
STPRFME COURT

JUDGE GREsHAM'S DECIIoN REVERSED BY THE
SUPREME COURT
Washington. Jan. lit has now become settled
law that witnesses cannot he compelled to testify in
| any criminal where the answer might tend 10
crminae them in any WAY or subject them possible
future prosecution. II is held that the Fi.;h Amend
ment TO the Constitution. giving persons the right 10
refuse to answer questions which might be used against
them in criminal cases. must be construed in It's
broadcast sense. such is the effect OF the decision Of
the supreme Court to-day in the celebrated Interstate
Commerce Of Charles Counseman. appellant.
aGins. Frank Hitchcock. Marshal Of the United states
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
This case Is OF great interest 10 railroads. and
has attracted widespread attention. Counsclman was
asked whether he had obtained from railroad
rates on grain shipments lower than the open rates
to all shippers He refused to answer on the ground
that it might criminate him. and claimed the pro-
lection OF the Constitutional guarantee conferred By the
Fifth Amendment. Judge Gresham decided against
him. and held him In contempt OF court ior refusing
10 answer the questions. and it is on appeal from
Judge Grcsham's order that the case decided by the
supreme Court today up.
The courts ruling Is that Judge Gresham's ORDER
was erroneous, and That COunselman cannot be COM
PEELED to testify 1t been said that the effect OF
decision by the Supreme Court that witnesses cannot
he compelled TO testify will seriously hamper tho
Interstate Commerce act The courts decision was
unanimous
senator CrlIlom was asked by Associated Press
reporter for his opinion with respect to the decs'oh
of the court. He said
In the passage OF the act thought that we hso
put provision IN the law which wonld prOteeg n
from the consequences Of his own testimony when "
against him in any criminal proceeding rocognnae
the interest and the importance OF the censtmu1hn
provision that witness should not be compelled W
criminatc himself The purpose OF me ln'eaS.ase ,
Commerce law was to throw around witness me scrt
against prosecution. Whether the provisions OF me
law are sufficient to give absolute protechoh 10 por
T%@S ~ ls, mor do so' to say whether the
supreme Court has gone further than Is necessary
argument closely But ! am afraid the court hardly
realizes that the people are entitled to pro'ec,pn IN
their rights as between themselves anu the common
Tut, without cri;ic~ins the decision wont to say
that the people Of the United states are dterniled
that tho common carriers % me country Sna n we
prohibited I'm some way from Il sregaITng the peoples
Trs'r the Common nw hey ar quasi public nsiiu.
lions. and they have no nsht under the common
discrimination which tn Comm. sioncrs were attempt,
tho law Is net quite Hight enough brad enough 10
protect ,hc individual rights OF the cltlfen' ana q,
VII tor tfc common carriers violating the Law,
there viii 10 some way found by winch we can Ect
AZ the fcts I'm regard a. such violations and at the
SANE ia- not .ioiate the right, OF citizens as W.T.
bctoc tc conf IT,. raIIade are n IN N
carricr do,-. business with shipper. Tie gives him
-, i.l rate nr ~ adNaIitag" IN some way over hi,
n.iglh.r The result + that the who has
he special privilege mikes money and The other man
& hc,,tDm np such conduct ought In somo way to he
nrohltc6 aad both parties the agent and the shipper
pnnshed FOR violation ~ a." Inv II The conrts shel
"a Con,trtle every effort the part ~ the people o
ye hold of the fact. r.. such violations OF tho law
20 as 10 uncover hem and punish The perpetrators, as
TO pr-ve, testimony being secured. this sort OF reck
los unjust Determination Will 60 Indefinitely and
The peoples rights will be Osregarfed ~ that
have sought 10 do not to injrc The railroads or
any other Interest simply Ia bring the adminlstrn
zion OF them Ia strict Observance ~ the common
law hv providing such statutory means as would orihg
The vioIatcrs OF the law 10 purishment.