Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1897-06-04
The Acquittal Of Searles.

/
| While Judge Bradley instructed the jury
to acquit Mr.. Havemeyer, the president of
the American Sugar Refining Company.
upon what was apparently technicality,
the question as to the Senate's authority
was met squarely and decided adversely to
the higher branch of Congress in the case OF
Mr.. Searles. The attorneys for the Sugar
Trust did not ask the latter's acquittal upon
any bubble of the law or any defect in the
indictment. They asserted, in effect, that it
was not the Senate's business whether the
Sugar Trust had contributed to the cam
paign fund of either party in State or local
elections, and Judge Bradley holds that the
contention is sound and that the Senate
committee had exceeded its authority In
asking Mr.. Searles whether the trust had
given money TO be used in political contests,
even though the money may have been
employed to accomplish the election of
Senator friendly, or at least not hostile, to
the trust.
Here, then, we have the law plainly stated
at last, provided that Judge Bradley's con
struction is sound and decisive. Gould
anything be more explicit or comprehen-
sive than the statement that ian investiga.
ton as to whether the Sugar Trust had con-
tributed to campaign fund would be an
unwarranted search into the private affairs
of the company and beyond the power of
the Senate" Although the Senate might
know in given case that a State Legisla.
ture had been elected by corruption fund
contributed for the purpose of securing the
choice of Senator pledged to do or not to
do certain things, it would, according to
Judge Bradley's decision, "be beyond the
power of the Senate to go behind the cleo
ton of legislative members" The Senate,
is, indeed, the judge of the qualifications of
its members, but apparently its powers are
so limited that it could not rid itself of a
member elected by bribery or corruption,
although the fact might be known of all
men.
After all, however, the Senate committee
which conducted the investigation in 1894
was appointed for the purpose OF ascertain.
ing whether any member of the Senate had
specialized in the stock of the Sugar Trust
while engaged in legislation which would
enhance the value of the stock The con-
tributions of the Sugar Trust were second
airy matter at best, but il was of prime i'm
portance to discover whether the charges
against Senators were true. Mr.. Chapman,
the New York broker, who refused to tes-
tify whether he had bought stock for any
Senators, Is now servings term in the Wash
ngton Jail. Was he the only man who
could give evidence as to the truth or falsity
of the charge that Senators had specialized
in the trusts securities or could the fact
have been established by extending the in
quiry? 1t has been stated that the investi-
eating committee found the trail was lead
ing dangerously near to the doors of Ger
tain Senators, aud therefore the investiga-
ton was abandoned before the mischief was
done and the odium fastened upon any Sen
ator or group of Senators. Mr.. Tillman, of
South Carolina, repeated this charge in the
Senate few days ago, and urged new in
vestigaton which should "investigate." If
Senators did speculate in sugar stock in
1894 and have speculated since the Dingley
bill was reported to the Senate, it is more
than probable that all evidences of the
transactions have been covered up beyond
the ability of any investigating committee
to get at the facts. Moreover, Senators who
were disposed to purchase stock the value
of which they could increase or diminish
by legislation would not buy securities at
first hand, but in roundabout ways and I'M
der assumed names so that their connection
with the transaction could never be salts
factorily established In court OF law.
In view OF the decisions in Judge Brad
ley's court, it seems to be plain that the
Sugar Trust can contribute to campaign
fund and resent as ian unwarranted search
into the private affairs of the company" any
attempt by Congress to discover the amount
or purpose of its contributions. IL is also
evident that Senators can profit by the laws
which they make with little fear of detec-
ton. These are important facts and may
have potent influence in determining the
character of future Legislation, in shaping
the election of United States Senators and
in establishing the ability of Senators to
"bull" or "bear" the stock market by tariff
bills drawn not only to provide revenue for
the government, but possibly tor Senators as
well-BalL0 iSnn