The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1894-11-14
SUGAR INDICTMENTS GOOD.
JUDGE corr ogERRULEs THE
BROKERS DEM URRERs.
Avowsl or the senste's Isteution 90 Use
the information Obtataed by Its Cor-
unittee Net Necessary and the Brokers
CouId Not He Excused fronn AnswerIpg.

Avawal OF the Senate's Mntention 60 Use
the Information Obtataed by Its Cor,-
uittee Not Necessary snd the Brokers
CouId Not Ne Excused fron Answering.
w~AsHtNaToS, Nov. 13.-Judge Cole this
morning. in Criminal Court Nc. =, rendered n
decision overruling the demurrer filed TO the
Indictments found against 4. r. Chapman and
j. W. Mccartney, stock brokers, for refusing to
tell the Senate committee. charged with %investl-
eating the sugar scandal, whether any United
States Senators had specialized in sugar stock
through their firms. After reviewing the In
dictment and the matters that brought about
the Investigation. Judge Cole says:
ut Is argued that no inference can legally be
drawn that the Senate intended to make any use
Of the information its committee was seeking
from the indicated witnesses in aid of Its judicial
or legislative functions. and that the existence
Of such purpose is jurisdictional and must APP
pear in the records Of the proceedings In the
senate by express declaration or avowal.
"This last proposition Is probably the most
important one upon the consideration Of these
demurrers, for II 1t Is well taken II il necessarily
fatal to these indictments, there being no ex-
press avowal or declaration by the Senate
In these resolutions Of n purpose to make any
specific use of the information when obtained.
The conclusion of the Court is that in order to
confer Jurisdiction on the committee II was not
necessary for the resolutions to set forth or avow
what final action the Senate had In oontempla-
tion upon the Information TO be obtained. It is
sufficient to jurisdiction IL It appears that the
Senate had lawful authority to take any legitl-
mate action, unless indeed Il also appears affirm
atively upon the face of the resolutions that
no action was contemplated. and that the In
vestigatiOn was to DO carried on simply for the
purpose OF vindicatlon or animadversion, and IL
cannot be commended that there is anything upon
the face of the resolutions mentioned In the
indictments to Justify such a construction.
Under parliamentary law and usage a commit
zee eced Il rsau W tSe an" hody S1 fpem which nc rf II prce ats PRS its
appointment, whether the resolution of appoint
ment requires q report OF, not. The only object
OF the appointment IL to obtain n report"
Judge Cole says the investigation ordered by
the resolutions was intended 20 ascertain, First,
whether brides had been offered to certain Sen
ators to INDUCE them to vote against the pend
ing Tariff bill; second, whether certain amend
had been reported to thc senate in considera-
tion Of money paid Tor campaign, pnr-
any contributions had been made by the Sugar
Trust, or any person connected Herewith, to any
P po.Ns' al party Pc sssn for or SsS% slsa. 1eT and eisSti9 9n, pa5.
whether any Senator had been specializing IN
what are known as sugar stocks during TIE
Senate:. fifth, whether any Senator had been
c~orruptly or Improperly influenced in the con-
attempt had been made to corruptly or improp-
erly influence legislation.
the facts sought in the fourth and dfth sub
divisions on the subject matter of the invest!ga-
tion would be, pertinent, material. and impor.
tant information for the Senate In the aid of
both its judicial and legislative functions seems
clear. The first, second, third. and sixth sub
divisions are simply ancillary to the others-in
the. nature Of circumstantial evidence, from
which the main facts recited in the fourth and
fifth might or might not be inferred, according
To the nature Of the facts and circumstances.
Whether the reporting of the, proposed
ftueuCed by the facts recitpl in the
fourth and Nth subdivisions would be in
portant information for the Senate to aid II In
the exercise Of its legislative functions on the
question OF the adoption or rejection of the
amendments. IL would also he important and
material information TO aid the Senate in the
exercise of its judicial functions IN deciding
whether any. senator had been guilty Of con:
duct justifying his censure or expulsion, Of
which the Senate In the sole judge. As a legal
use OF the information sought was possible, the
anything in the resolutions to the contrary, that
the senate intended to make that use Of 1t, II
obtained"
Judge Cole also held that the defendants
questions asked by the senate committee.
and his conclusion is that the Senate COM
mites had Jurisdiction Of the subject
questions alleged to have been put to the de-
fendants were pertinent and material thereto,
and that in falling TO answer them, II they did
of violation Of section l02 Of the Revised
Statutes Of the United States.
The remaining question was whether the re-
Of Vice-President Stevenson that the defendants
had refused to answer questions should be set
forth in the indictments, and this is answered
in the Affirmative.
When Judge Cole had finished reading his de-
cision, ex-Judge Jere Wilson. representing the
defendants. gave notice Of his intention To ask
that the case be taken to the Court of Appeals.