The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1897-07-23

oS !eau9, Willcni III turn, would SbsE EsuCs@3
cesaed d by fourth, and the fourth by 5as.
nth There would be no end..,s5
They say that the Senate has on 5geve.-as
raj occasions held with referen CO SS tzisss
proposed investigations iato$ the co1id dnGsSss
OF It's members that "in ord er} to wafra fSs
so grave a. proceeding there should ] kbssss
SOME tangible evidencesone aperificss
ana properly supported allegation S of a
fact from q responsible source. ard Ii uts III
merely vague general charges OF rlI-.SS,,
niors,'' tt
The committee say with reference ton
the, portion of the resolution fwifc fch Sfes&S
quifes the reopening OF the inquify or
1924, that no new evidence has beeiIs
produced, and that the proceeding q MI
the courts "in the matter Of certain cone
tumacious witnesses do not show any,
probability Of securing informal lon sbeTsS
yond that already adduced.' q IT, ~ csaIESs
attention to the fact that In aii58I thee
prosecutions growing out OF tlieE formers
inquiry there was only one conytcti5n;ls 81
the others being acquitted on the grounH
that the questions put to them were notg
pertinent l45
The committee concludes that thfgSe
status cannot be changed by raropeninEs
the case. syss III
inquiry bn made whether the sugar trust
"has contributed to or con trolied thas
election of Senator In this body atsanXs
time" the committee eXpra asaeS the Op iisaa
lon that "the time to oinvestigate e a SUBJ
tect OF that characte is when some SaY1.@
dence Is offered to show cause for ttlnss
Inquiry, and adds tfla -. upon the lsss%
Etion Of a Senator, his poll itical cor hers
opponents. arc ufiicient ys4alt iAs
alert in their own interest or In hes ~
,ferest Of their party to Ir1a Il Ell Known
the Senate any regularity orr Gahssa
for contest In his election In 30 far saSss
the American Sugar Refining compaIIyss
may offend against the !Statu tes of tiIe
United States. let IT he dea It wi III aG8ss
cordlng to law, We are not n t he npol1Ses
gists of that company or any OTHER T1leS
want of popularity Of that company oTYs
any other can never Of itself tbe hefdss
to be 4 ground fer inYestiga Ing ftiaiS
right Of Senators to- their eents.sa Ifs iEsbaE3
our duty, upon our own Initiatives and s.
without the slightest warrant from any,
known fact. to investigate whether
corporation has Contributed to Or cqriss
trolled the election Of q Senat tor In hisss
body at any time, why stop AtS onGS;
corporation? Why not prepare u az liEfss
OF all corporations in the United SratesIMs
call UP the officers Of each ard examinSts
into the question whether; such corpoTaessNss
tions have Gin anyWise contributed to
or controlled the election or a. SenatSrs
in this body at any tim ~
< The process of examination would 'fsM
endless, and there would be no time f0ISl
the performance OF any legisl latiYe dtisss
ties. 5 I'll 81
The committee goes atllengt into the
question of the broprletY Of exp allings
from the Senate press gallery or sen ds5sss
ing to prIson/neWspaper$c $correspondentssH
who make false charges. akipg aS pbsfSsS
tion against both suggest tiona.S iTheySs
say that expulsion from he 4 gallsfMss
would fbe disproport15ned Sto oSS tn es8 fsss
fense. as the other galleries of the Sen
ate would be open to the offenderasa
''It might even be-" the commit tteeaad q anss
"that the notorlety acquired bySa4c6TsSs
respondent by reason Of ouch expulsfDM;saa q:
instead OF operating as a punishnantsS
would prove a source Of pronotionsitsSs
his profession. z 1885
Furthermore, they conclud e. That sil cfas
punishment would have mo 81 influ ueHaess
upon the newspaper etorsS thenaa
selves. and that, with the pressS ass
citation covering the ground, e Il swO1l ld hexi
impossible to deprive neWspa roifI#,
securing the news, M
The committee supply s. li6t8 OfSprosxss
secut!ons OF newspaper wri ers Sshy 5essas
Senate. beginning with the case fof 2sVRiIsssaS
liam Dunane,| of 1900, from ~ Ich sSftfh
conclusion Is drawn that 1noyerysh eaHsssMs
Denalties have been i Imposed ssS forSgti1s8s s
resuscancy Of ~ newspaper W tnssss5Sss
AS to the Imprisonment of 20 neWsp pa SsesfSS
CORRESPONDENCE editors or pub isheSs E0Ess
making statements not wa rrantedssby sa
the fact, the committee @consid erss t!!fat@s
nothing but the imperilmeIt ot tRes
gravest public interests shOul q sni1naEH5 EH5Sss
resort to such an extre1ntty.I Its sas tsStsS
OF the question, on the eve OF the atWsHsass
tieth century for any one to- 1inderfak
to Imprison journalists for EeYerYSWaEu aSs
Indefinite charge VII ichs t hey may ssi irss;
culate No legislative 8podie les won
sustained In such av Il ON by Sthe eGIf fsss
ened public opinion Of the EoGn trY 5ag 5ss
e5i"It is no disparag gement G OF Sleg lH1ati
bodies to admit the inv alu ail la$ fIS1cf oIssSS
or the press In the maIntenaneas1fsaF aFeaa
. That func ion is % tfsf s5s s5S
to be subjected Ito naTtSsyaP aPssNs
strictions or circuns scrtbe d M sssss
liberal bounds, merely # tog gcorractfHsH fH fH3s as
position to ever erseYerityk:o of
The remedy wo1ld q u beSS worse ssias fsss
disease Legislat Who
and unsupported char rget9 affent I'd
action tythe elr Iboa W. see tite ssss
accusat Ion and ms Is tsg pong
occasion TO rsfie ct ppfI
would be done To free
the attempt on sscska Il tSY
to me- He pres
ciaed ever frse11
or public act
aver be
nower