Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-10-13
SUGAR TRUST WITNESSES
Mr.. Shellabarger Concludes His Argument
for the Defendants.


The arguments In the hearing on the de-
mu-rer to the indictments returned against
Messrs. John w. Mccartney and Elverton
r. Chapman. the alleged contumacious
sugar trust witnesses, was not concluded
yesterday afternoon, Judge Cole adjourning
the hearing at 3 80 until 10 o'clock this
morning.
Mr.. Shellabarger had not concluded his
argument in support of the demurrer when
the hearing was adjourned, and this morn
ing he resumed.
1t was not the purpose of the defendants,
explained Mr.. Shellabarger, to question the
constitutionality of the statute governing
the case. their purpose merely being to show
that the Senate committee conducting the
investigation had not lawfully conducted II,
and that the questions asked were authoriz-
ed neither by the law nor the circumstances
in the case. The proceedings instituted
against the defendants. said Mr.. Shellabar-
ger. while, perhaps, proper under the letter
of the 4aw, certainly was not under the
spirit and real intent Of the law.
Sc far as the common law was concerned
the thing now sought to be made a crime
and offense. said Mr.. Shellabarger, never
before was such. Therefore, if it was
sought to be made such by statute, all the
conditions, precedent and requisites, should
have been observed by the Senate when it
directed the investigation. That is. ex-
planned Mr.. Shellabarger before the Senate
could obtain Jurisdiction to make the in
quiries it had to do certain things which
the statute made mandatory. But, he said,
that mandatory mode Rad not been pur-
sued in the present instance, and, therefore,
the Senate committee was without jurisdic-
tion. Consequently, II had no authority to
PROFOUND the inquiries which the defendants
were charged with, refusing to answer.
The grand jury had. contended Mr.. Shella-
barger, no jurisdiction in the present case
Until after the Senate committee had re-
pOrte0 the alleged cODfumac ciOuS witnesses
to the Senate and had surrendered them to
the Senate for that boiy's action under the
statute
The decision of the United States Supreme
Court in the kilbourn case was quoted by
Mr.. Shellabarger as sustaining his conten-
tion that the Senate committee had no juriS
GictIon In the matter.
A general drag-net, said Mr.. Shelabarger,
thrown out to catch somebody, anybody.
everybody, or nobody, is no more n judicial
form, proceeding case in one of the
houses of Congress, in the exercise of its
judicial functions, than would such a drag
net be in one of the courts of the country.
Mr.. Shellabarger. in concluding his argu-
ment at 12:D, asserted that where a resolu-
ton of either house of Congress shows that
It's objects and aims are merely political,
and not in connection with intended legisla-
ton, or with any other matters upon which
the House could act, but merely intended
TO subject the party or body investigated
TO public animadverSion, or to vindicate
him or 1t from unjust aspersions in such an
investigation, there is no power to punish a
witness for refusing to answer.
AT the conclusion of Mr.. Shellabarger's
argument recess was taken until o'clock
when District Attorney Brney addI Iessed
the court in support of the motion to dis
Miss the demurrer.
The argument of the district attorney was
concluded at 2:3O, when the hearing was ad-
Journed until 10 o'clock Monday morning
Assistant Attorney General Conrad will
then make the closing argument for the
government, he to be followed by Mr. Jere.
VI. Wilson.