Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-05-14
CHAPMAN AND HAvEMEYER.


FAINT sugar-Trust broker. has telegraphed
that he will arrive in Washington on
Monday to submit to the imprisonment
10 which he will be sentenced.
While the wilson Gorman tar'n bill
was under consideration, rumors got anoa'
that several senators. who knew what
was going on In the committee ABOUT 'he
| sugar schedule, took advantage Oh 'he"
| position TO take turn at sugar Inc
result was that each one OF them - sdiu
| 10 have made a large proht. In que
| course a fumbllng sort OF investigation
| was instituted. and Chapman, the broker
was called as witness.
He was generally believed to nave exc
cuted orders for several senator's; but ne
would make no admissions. He pohteiy
| declined TO answer the committees ques-
| t,ons. And in this course he was acS
vised by his attorneys. Yet. IL no sena-
| tors had placed orders with him during
| the time specified. 1t would have been the
easiest possible matter for Chapman 10
have said so; but no, he stood upon his
supposed rights and declined to reveal
the secrets OF his business.
Thereupon he was he'd to De IN con-
tempt OF the Senate, and was sent u
the District Court Cor t'ial. the court
covo him a hearing, and fixed his puh'sh-
mont at thirty days in jail From th's
Judgment Chapman took an appeal 10
the United States Supreme Court. but
that tribunal gave him no comfort. Inc
Judgment of the lower court was anrfnea'
and now Chapman is good enough to tele-
craph that he Will come on to Washlng-
ton TO undergo the farce of imprisonment
IN Injurious apartments fitted up Tor MIN
4, the iail of the national capital.
But, to go back few days. we ma
that n petition has been circulated among
senators asking the President 10 PARDON
chairman. In this movement there was
n small ouantun of sympathy for CHAP
man and much alarm for Havemeyer
and searles. These two were also before
the Senate Committee, and also refused 10
answer. So If the President could De
gotten 10 pardon Chapman. it Is thoush'
he would of necessity have to pardon
Havemeyer and Searles also.
Rut now we are told that notwithstand-
ing many senators have expressed
Willingness to have Chapman pardonen'
M onnlication for Executive clemency
viii be presented in his behalf. The rea-
con for this. we think, is clear. Mr..
Allen. of Nebraska, has appealed to his
Nut themselves
record against pardon being granted, I'M
less Chapman first comes before the SEN
ate and purges himself OF all contempt
nv freely and fully answering all the
questions that have been asked him.
Senators would probably not like TO
,,ota down such a resolution, while. upon
the other hand, If it should be adopted
some of them might be embarrassed very
much.
II will be recalled that each Of the sena-
TORS was examined by the Senate lnVesu-
eating Committee. and each and all lex
cent Mr.. Quay denied having specu.ateu
in sugar stocks. Now, just suppose 'hau
c,honman should come before the Senate
with his books and papers. and snow
that others besides Quay were customers
If his, See how very embarrassing tha'
would be.
If is a moot question whether the fresl-
dent has the power TO pardon any one
who is committed for contempt Oh the
conate But. be that as it may MT
uoar pives IL as his decided opinion that
neither a pardon nor even the serving OF
tho sentence of the court can reheVe
chairman of the obligation to appear De-
fore the Senate and purge himself OF con-
toront We hope that Mr.. Hoar VIII
maintain this position and make CHAP
man nroduce his books and tell the whoie
story. or else submit to another tour
in Jail.
t,or chairman we care nothing. But
g &c necessary to get at him In order
n get at Havemeyer and Searies'
We understand, of course, that the cases
| 30 IIavcmever and Searles are not idenu-
cal with Chapmans but they are IKE MS
in that they are cases OF alleged con-
tempt of the Senate.
II Chapman is to be allowed 10 get
| off after a farcical Imprisonment ana
yitbout purging himself of contempt OF
oo,,rso Havemeyer and Searles VIII es-
| cape in the same way.
THE ability Of the Sugar Trust 10 con-
troll congressional legislation Is great
scandal TO and outrage upon this country
We shouldn't do much boasting anou'
.,o,,r institutions" so long as the specta-
o,o &c presented to the world of senators
hand-in-glove with Chapman searies' anu
| Havemeyer.
The Dingley bill, as it came from the
House. was too favorable to the sugar
Trust but the Senate Committee pro-
noses amendments vastly more partial TO
| the ,rust. we are glad to learn, how
ever. from the New York Herald, That a
canvass of the Senate shows 1t Is impos-
slGe for the committees amendments 10
be adopted. The mere recommending OF
these amendments sent sugar stock up
| and II Is suspected that some senators
nrofted thereby. However that may be,
II would be well for the antitrust sena-
tors TO act together and keep a shaxp
lockout. The aggressiveness of trusts
and their ability to control Congress OIL
| fers a fearful menace to the peace OF
this country. 1t Is more than any other
thing responsible for the strong anti
| capitalistic sentiment which prevails In
so many quarters.
While the Sugar Trust and its friends
and servants are going 30 one extremity
it's opponents go to another. The way
to stop this sort Of thing Is 10 make IL
clear to the people that the courts ana
! Congress control the Sugar Trust ana
| not tho frnsf them.