Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1894-06-16
Liberty of Newspaper Men.

ton, Tor that would IoTSNer OAR MIN out
from the confidence Of those upon whom
he depends for future Information. But
to the leading cases.
Liberty OF Newspaper Men.
In 1912 Nathaniel Rounsavclt of tho
Alexandria Na.) News WAS brought before
the bar Of the house, refused to answer
and was ordered into custody, after which
the suspected member rose In his place
and confessed. 1t WAS Hon John Smile
of Pennsylvania who had given Mr.. Roun-
savclI information about some secret nc
tiun un the embargo. y little later John
Randolph got into n fine rage because n
PHILADELPHIA paper had charged him with
rcr,.viu-. British gold for opposing the
war hut the correspondent i'll this case
proved vv,u morn lvaky than n congress
man. and while the discussion was at white
heat John {. Calhoun charged that Mr.
Randolph himself had leaked" advanced
information about she intended embargo
- far rs can be determined from the i'm
perfect record OF that time, Randolph did
not deny the charge. The information was
given 10 n Boston shipping firm, who had
1; taken TO Boston in - hours by express
riders. and so all the vessels in that and
neichborinG ports got out 10 sea before tho
ports were officially closed. 1t was also
brought ont that Hon. Willis Aston, Jr.,
of South Carolina was responsible for tho
charge that Randolph had been bribed
hut by that timc all parties werc so deep
In the miro that they were glad to drop it.
II was during this discussion that Mat
thew Lyon laid down the brond principle
that the frccst possible prcss was tho surest
corrCCtor Of the liccntious press-in other
words that correspondents should have all
possible liberty so far as congress was con-
ccrnCd. being responsible only under tho
lil,cl laws, for in that case tho truthful
writers would mako the others ridiculous
and deprive them Of employment.
1t Caused n Fright.
1t was in 1887 that James W. Simonton
bcCan the long war about corruption in
land grants to railroads, His first vigorous
article in the New York Times put the
house in a fine rage. and Mr.. Simonton
was taken into custody for refusing to give
the sources Of his information. Several
members had denounced all the charges
with great vChCmCncc when one rose and
dcClapd that there must he something in
them. for he had been Offered 81, 500 to
vote for bill. 1t was like the writing on
the wall TO BClshazzar. There was an aw-
full silence and then an explosion. An in
vcStiGation was orJlcrt d. and it was re-
marked that n surprisingly large number
of members Mt once sent home letters de-
SIariHg ilIat they would not be candidates
for denomination. The investigation was
Us complete "A farce rs any in the history
81 congreSs- This war over corruption in
land grants and railroads ragged intermit-
tently for 10 years and ended In the great
Crrdit Mobilier scandal, which throw back
81 dark a shadow on preceding cases that
IL is now the common belief that all or
nearly all tho land grants wcro secured by
corrupt methods
1t was in 1857 also that the oft repeated
charges about British gold" in tariff leg
islatiOn were Investigated. The act Of
March 8, 1857, was passed by what Is
sometimes called tho first Republican
house, of which Nathaniel p. Banks was
speaker, but only SO Republicans voted
for tho act and 20 against 1t, while every
Democrat in the house but two voted for
1t LOWS D. Campbell OF Ohio was chair
man of the committee on ways and means.
On Jan. IL, 1858, the New York papers
published a report made in Massachusetts,
ono part OF which charged that u largo
manufacturing company had paid $S7, OOO
TO secure tho passage of tho low tariff bill,
Massachusetts, being then very earnest in
favor Of free wool Hon. Benjamin Stan
ton Immediately opened a fight in con-
grcSs, and to tho very close OF it was saw
nsely persistent In all measures for max
ing the witnesses testify. His principal
opponent, though not In tho house, was
Reverdy johnson, whose argument Is well
worth reading at this time He pointed
out that inquisitorinl power exercised by
. court which Is at tho same Legislative
body would inevitably work far greater
mischief than could the utmost license OF
the press. His final statement Is encour-
aging, Tho eye Of q discerning and hon
est constituency and the public opinion Of
the body which the member may by his
presence pOllute with his conscious guilt,
furnishing him day and night with COM
FUNCTIONS visitings, will In o briof period
oonsign him to tho degraded Lowell to which
Ae belongs"
Obstinate Witnesses.
The investigating committee was at thai
time after the business men rather thar
the correspondents, and In his argument
Mr.. Stanton brought up the case of one
Anderson, of which the record is found In
the files OF the Judiciary and not In that
of congress. This Anderson was imprison
I'd In 1918 and brought suit against the
scrgeant-at-arms for false imprisonment
The case was taken 10 tho supreme court
which sustained the power Of congress Il
imprison rebellious witnesses. The com