St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-05-31
NOR ALIN

NOR 4LLH pURBLIND.
The refusal of the newspaper cor
respondents at Washington to divulge
their sources of information as to the
accusations of bribery preferred against
senators IN connection with the sugar
schedule has placed the senate in a
predlcament. There was a protracted
discussion on Tuesday as to the course
to be Observation-Disclosures the inquiry
should be allowed to drop. or the con-
tumacious correspondents be punished
for contempt. There was a general
belief that unless the correspondents
receded from their position 1t would be
useless to pursue the inquiry further,
and several of the senators expressed
themselves in favor OF compelling the
| correspondents to divulge the sources
Of their information or commit them for
contempt of the authority of the senate
and lis committee. Senator Hill ad-
vised the summoning Of every member
of the senate and compelling them to
testify as to their knowledge of bribery
or attempted bribery, and treating the
correspondents with utter contempt.
The right of the senate or OF the house
to commit for contempt is all open
question. There is but II case on
record to serve as IL precedent-that of
Hallett Kilbourne, the recalcitrant wit
ness in the Boss Sheppard inquiry sew
eral years ago. 1t will be remembered
that Mr.. kilbourne refused to produce
certain books and papers in his posses
sion bearing upon the matter under in
quiry, and was committed to the old
capitol prison by order of the house.
The case was brought before the courts
on a writ of habeaS corpus, and Mr..
kiIbourne was released, the court hold
ing that neither house OF congress had
a legal right to impriSon a witness for
contempt. This decision was a serious
blow to those members of congress who
were anxious to eXalt their own dignity
and authority, but was generally re-
garded as just and proper. for though it
resulted in that case in defeating to
some extent the ends of justice, it
placed a check upon the tendency then
predominant in congress Of %arrogating
extraordinary aud dangerous powers to
that body.
The practical failure of the pending
investigation was manifest throughout
the debate. There was. however, one
feature of it which should not be passed
without comment. Senator Hill boldly
asserted the right of senators to enter
the stock markets and to speculate in
shares that were likely to be affected IN
price by senatorial action-an assertion,
in effect, that the votes of senators
might be employed bythem for the pur-
pose of bearing or bulling the markets
for their individual profit. Such a
claim is extraordinary. TO say the least.
Some will call it Infamous. and would
not be far wrong in thus characterizing
it. With equal propriety a judge OH the
bench might discount his knowledge OF
what his decision would be IN a case be-
fore him affecting the rights of a corpo-
ration. and reap a profit from speculat-
ing in its shares.
A law of the United States declares
that no senator or representative shall
vote upon any question before congress
in which he has a direct personal or
pSCuliolS i4lClCSts L!lC pGt pOoS VI GliS
law is obvious. Yet it is violated every
day. The silver senators who SC long
INSTRUCTED the passage of the repeal bill
last summer, all had a large %pecuniary
interest in that measure. Wolcott,
Stewart, Jones and Teller are largely
interested in silver mining, and had no
legal right to vote upon the measure in
nnpcfinn nd en- If 10 with manv nf
the senators who are now attempting to
fix our tariff system. A large number
of them have a considerable interest in
enterprises that are affected by the bill.
Some W stock in the sugar trust;
others are largely involved in the lum.
Der trade; still others own and operate
coal and iron mines. while nearly every
one of the number is a shareholder in
some corporation that will be either
benefited or injured by the rates of duty
fixed by the pending bill. Can we eX-
pect fair and disinterested legislation
from such a body of men, %prejudiced
as they must naturally be? 1t is indeed
a d%iScouraging outlook; and the pros
pectis not improved by the bold declar-
alton of one of the leading senators that
the members of that body have a right
to engage in speculation and to profit
by the fluctuations in the markets that
may be produced by their own votes.
The worst enemy of Senator Hill has
entertained a higher opinion of his
official integrity than he seems to have
of his W morality. His words are not
hose Of a statesman: they are not those
of an honest man. Perhaps they were
Intended as mere bravado, but it would
have been better if they had remained
unSaid. No senator who has a vestige
of honesty can exercise the privilege
which Mir. Hill claims for himself and
his associates, for it would be destruc.
tive of the entire fabric of good govern
ment. Senator Hill is morally pur-
blind.
IT is claimed by the mother of Mrs.
Maybrick. now undergoing life impris-
onment in England for poisoning her
husband, that she has new and positive
evidence of the fact that Mr.. Maybrick
was a confirmed arsenic eater, and had
frequently purchased the drug, both in
London and Paris. This evidence is
apparently conclusive Of the fact that
Maybrick's death was due to an over
dose of the drug taken by himself 20
cure a skin eruption. The grave doubt
as to Mrs. Maybrick's guilt should lead
to a further investigation of the case,
for there is little doubt but a grave in.
justice has been perpetrated upon her.
AN OPEKATIC EPISODE,
Lillian RusSeIPs numerous matrimo-
MIA episodes have been made the sub
ject of much invidious comment and