The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-05-29
CAN THE SENATE COMPEL WITNESSES
TO TESTIFY?

II Is not stating the case too strongly
TO say that the people OF the thteu
States were very greatly shocked Wheh
the announcement went out TO them that
the committee investigating the alleged
IRREGULARITIES in the Senate had deter
mined to take their proceedings in secret.
The reason announced for this course
was deemed utterly inadequate and more
in the nature Of an excuse for resoiu-
ton already taken to cover up and con-
ceal the facts
The plea is now made that the COM
mittee has no power TO compel recalci-
trant witnesses TO give evidence, and II
this plea prevails and the investigation
for that reason comes TO naught, the
American people will become thoroughly
Disguised with the whole business IN
truth. The case should, therefore, be
looked into most critically. The difficulty
In the case arises from these facts: In
1876 the House Of Representatives passed
q resolution reciting that the Government
of the United States was a creditor or
jay Cooke & CO., then In bankruptcy, by
reason Of a deposit by the Secretary
of the Navy OF Government money with
the London branch of that firm; that a
certain real estate pool in Washington in
which that house had an interest, had
been only partially enquired into by
preceding committee of the House OF
Representatives: that the trustee Of Jay
Cooke & co. had made settlement WIN
the members Of the firm to the disad-
vantage and loss of its creditors; that
the courts were powerless to protect
them, and it therefore appointed COM
mittee and directed il 10 inquire into
the history Of said real estate pool and
the character of the settlement made
1t was very well known at the time that
this was a political job intended, under
pretence Of taking care of the Govern
ment's interests in a bankrupt concern,
10 uncover President Grants and leading
Republicans alleged interest in Boss
Sheppards real estate transactions In
Washington.
Hallet Kilbourn was secretary Of the
real estate pool. He was summoned be-
fore the committee and asked TO state
who were members OF the pool. He re-
fused, was adjudged 10 be In contempt
and was imprisoned by order OF the
House of Representatives. He sued the
Sergeant-at-Arms of the House tor ui-
lawful Imprisonment. The lower court
dismissed his suit. He appealed 10 the
Supreme Court of the United States
which, after most exhaustive examiha-
ton into and discussion OF the whole
case held that the order OF the House
was no justification for the imprison-
rnent. The case was subsequently tried
by n Jury, which awarded kilbourn $780,
600 damages. The law settled by the case
Is this: That the substance Of the pro-
ceeding was TO make debt due TO the
United States. But said the Supreme
Court, the House OF Representatives has
nothing To do with collecting debts due
20 the Government. The courts are the
forums that have jurisdiction of these.
and the Government must sue for its
debts In these as all other parties plaintiff
do. The whole proceeding. therefore, was
what the lawyers call ultra vires-that is.
a body was attempting 10 exercise an
authority that was not committed TO IT
by the Constitution of the Government.
But the court expressly pointed out that
there were certain matters committed
by the Constitution 10 the custody or
each body OF Congress. and. in taking
care OF these, the court conceded that
At was entirely competent for each house
to summon WITNESSES and compel them
20 testify. 1t says QOs u. s. r., 1901
"Each house is. by the Constitution.
made the judge of the election and quail
fication OF It's members. In deciding on
these II has the undoubted right TO ex-
anime witnesses and inspect papers" ana
the right TO compel the witnesses to tes-
tify,
TIE decision draws a broad line OF
distinction between a case which Is no
more In substance than an assertion OF
q right by one party whether tbe Gov
eminent or any otheD against another,
and a case that involves the exercise by
either house OF an authority necessary
TO a proper performance OF any OF its
functions II given case. however II
may be named, is really one OF the first
class, neither house Of Congress has
anything to do with II. and II must be
asserted In the courts. II II really be-
longs 10 the second class, then either
house has the right TO summon witnesses
ana compel them TO testify. This makes
II Of the last Importance 10 determine
what IL the scope OF this constitutional
authority OF each house to Judge of the
election and qualification OF It's mem
bers.
The provision is rightfuiiy regarded as