The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1897-03-13

the members as persons private reme-
dies through the courts, but could not
affect any action taken or to be taken
by the House as legislative body. To
hold that the Senate may ask wit
ness, ''Who told you?" Have you
heard?' etc, when the witness has sald
he has no personal knowledge of the
matter, is irrelevant, and therefore Is
to invade the constitutional right OF the
citizen, and in which he must be pro-
tected; and is an attempt to exercise
judicial power.
The Legislature, he concluded, has
power to call for papers and witnesses,
and ask questions concerning the con-
duct of members. The question is not
whether a paper shall be forced to dis
close information gained by it, but
whether or not an individual can be
forced to disclose sacred secrets IN
which he claims immunity for the
sources of information.
The Senate, he said, had the right to
investigate charges against members,
but no right to demand information as
to where the information published was
obtained That is the private recourse
of the members, and their remedy can
be found in the courts The resolution
adopted by the Senate, he said, was to
find out if the charges We're true, and
if not, if they were public SANDER. II
the charges are untrue and someone
has slandered members in newspaper,
what is the Senate going to do and
what action can it take? 1t has right
70 uia n =
sion, but no right to use its
power further in private inter
ests. 1t had no right to demand of the
petitioners as to their knowledge Of
the truth of the charges.
A recess was then taken till 1:30
o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
In the afternoon Mr.. McEnerny contin-
ued his argument reading largely from
decisions in cases in this and other
States.
He claimed that in this tSate in the
Mccarthy case there was nothing look
ing toward the finding out whether pub
lie Islander had been committed, as the
resolution adopted by the Senate IN TINS
case does. The questions that the petit
TONERS refused to answer were not rele-
want, material or pertinent. He raised
the point that LeVingS was asked II ne
knew of any telegram sent to influence
the vote of a Senator, that he properly
declined to answer, as kilograms of that
character could be lawfully sent and re-
ceived. Had the question ben asked, he
said, whether he knew of any kilograms
sent to improperly influence a Sena-
tor he would have had no right to refuse
to answer
In conclusion he said that the office of
a writ of habeas corpus was to protect
the rights of a person. If it apears that
in the exercise of his constitutional
rights he refused to answer these ques-
tions he should be set free and that the
Senate had no right to pursue an inquiry
that will aid in the enforcement of priv
ate interests 1t had overStepped its
authority in this case and the people
should be protected. He asked that the
decision should be such as to protect
them from such usurpation of authority.
Deputy Acknowledgement Anderson
said that in the short time accorded to-
him to prepare his case he had not had
an opportunity to examine large num-
Der of authorities and go into the case
as exhaustively as Mr.. McEnerny had,
but he thought he could show conclu-
sively that the arguments and citations
he would make were effective in sustain
ing his view of the case. Till the last
he had been in doubt as to what Mr.. Nc
Enerny intended to urge. He now saw
that he claimed that no power to punish
the petitioners was conferred on the
Senate AS matter of fact, the law does
give it that power, and if so 1t makes
no difference how far the resolution
went Counsel had attempted to per-
suade the court that the Senate exceed
ed its jurisdiction and inquired into mat
ters beyond it, but abandoned that
theory later.
Under that concession all the cases
cited by counsel fall, for in the case of
Kilbourn VS.. Thompson the Representa-
tives were not proceeding in a matter
over which they had jurisdiction. Here
the Senate has jurisdiction. He did not
believe the court had jurisdiction to eX-
anime into whether the questions and
facts We're material or not. The ques-
ton for the court to inquire into is that
of Jurisdiction. If the Senate is not an
inferior court, this court has no right
to investigate its procedure If it de-
termined that the Senate had a right