The news & observer., 1897-07-23

end"
They say that the Senate has ON sew
ora Occasions held with reference 10
proposed Investigations into the conduct
| nf ;ts members that in order to warrant
SO grave a proceeding there should De
some tangible evidence, some SPECIFIC ana
properly supported allegation OF 1act
| from a responsible source, and not mere
llv vague general charges Of rumors.
The committee say with reference TO
the norton of the resolution, which
REQUIRES the re-opening Of the inquiry
of 1904. that no new evidence has Deen
nroduced and that the proceedings IN the
court .'in the matter of certain con-
tumacious witnesses do not show any
probability of securing information be-
vond that already adduced." They call
attention to the fact that in all the
nrosecutions growing out of the former
inquiry there was only one convlcuon,
the others being acquitted on the ground
that the questions put to them were not
pertinent. 49,, 49,
The committee concludes that this
stains cannot be changed by re-openlng
the case.
With reference to the proposition that
inquiry be made whether the sugar
trust has contributed to or controlled the
election Of q Senator in this body at
any time, the committee expresses the
opinion that "the time to investigate
subject Of that character will be when
some evidence is offered to show cause
for the inquiry" and adds that upon
the election Of a Senator, his political
or other opponents are sufficiently active
and alert in their own interest or in the
interest of their party to make known
to the Senate any irregularity or cause
for contest in his election. In so far
as the American Sugar Refining Com
pany may offend against the statues of
the United States let it be dealt with
according to law. We are not the
apolOgists of that company or any 0tner.
The want of popularity of that company
or any other can never of itself be held
to be ground for investigating the
right Of Senators to their seats. If IT
be our duty, upon our own initiative ana
without the slightest warrant from any
known fact, to investigate whether
corporation has Contributed to or con-
trolled the election of a Senator in this
body at any time," why stop at one cor
poration? Why not prepare list or
all corporations in the United States,
call up the officers of each and ex-
anime into the question whether such
corporations have ''in any wise con-
tributed to or controlled the election of
Senator in this body at any time?
The process of explanation would be
endless and there would be no time for
the performance Of any legislative duties.
The committee goes at length into
the question of the propriety Of expelllng
from the Senate press gallery or sending
to prison newspaper correspondents who
make false charges, taking a position
against both suggestions. They say
that expulsions from the gallery would
be disproportioned to the offense, as the
other galleries of the Senate would be
open to the offenders. ut might even
be-" the committee added, that the
notoriety acquired by a correspondent
by reason Of such expulsion instead Of
operating as a punishment would prove
a source of promotion in his profession"
Furthermore, they conclude that such
punishment would have no influence up
on the newspaper proprietors themselves
and that, with the press associations
covering the ground, it would be i'm
possible to deprive newspapers from Sc
curing the news.
The committee supply a list OF prose
cutions Of newspaper writer's by the Sen
ate, beginning with the case of VIM.
DUANE, of 1900, from which the con-
clusion is drawn that no very heavy
penalties have been imposed for the re-
cusancy of newspaper witnesses. AS to
the imprisonment of newspaper CORE
spondents, editors, or publishers, for
making statements not warranted by the
fact. the committee consider shat moth
ing but the imperilment of the gravest
public interests should compel resort
to such an extremity. 1t is out Of the
question. ON the eve of the twentieth
century, for any one to undertake to inn
prison journalists for every vague, in
definite charge which they may circulate.
No legislative bodies would be sustained
in such action by the enlightened public
opinion of the country.
SIT is no disparagement of legislative
bodies to admit the Invaluable function
of the press in the maintenance OF free
government. That function is too i'm
portant to be subjected to narrow re-
strictions or circumscribed within illiber-
al bounds, merely to correct disposition
to overseverity of criticism. The remedy
would be worse than the disease. Legis-
lators who, in every loose and unsup-
ported charge affecting the action Of their
body, see the specter Of accusation and
insist upon imprisonment In default OF
proof, should take occasion to reflect up
on the injury that would be done to free
government by the attempt on every
occasion ito bring to book members OF the
press who exercised over freely the right
Of criticism Of public acts. While the
right must ever be maintained by the
law making power to protect itself from
assault whencesoever emenating, yet the
exercise of this right should be reserved
for occasions of extraordinary import
ance. Freedom of the press is guaranteed
by the constitution, is essential to exist
ence of free government, and should not
lightly be interfered with" '
"The committee do not accept the view
that the Senate will stand convicted Of
the charges il it does not officially dis
prove them.
although" the report says, ''the press