The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-03-24


| mine should the operators not obey the
! Proclamation
Il assumed that authority
What would you have done with a work.
ingman who did not obey the permit proc
lamation?''
Il would have dealt with him as the
case demanded.
Governor Steunenberg admitted that he
had issued orders of commitment in blank,
| that DR.. France and Sinclair might fill in
the names of the men whom they might
desire to commit without the formality Of
warrant.
The Governor said ne knew nothing OF
| the commitment OF Tilford. He answered
| Il do not know" TO many questions, and re-
fused TO make direct replies to many more.
! In the matter of habeas corpus, the wit
, ness was finally compelled to answer that
| the writ did not issue. He would not say
| that It had been suspended. Then he was
asked by Mr. Robertson:
Refused to Answer.
You did not want it to issue, did YOU"
| The attorney, Mr. CLANCY, objected, and
! the Governor said: II do not think that is
| a proper question 10 ask me-
| Mr.. Cox said Here is the Governor OF
state who refuses to say whether he was
| or was not opposed TO the issuance of the
most sacred of law writs. Why will he not
! say yes or no."
| The roll was called, and by vote of
| c to the witness was excused from an
swering. the Republican members voting to
| relieve him of that embarrassment.
The Attorney General of Idaho, in the
| courts of that State. represented that the
Governor had suspended the writ of habeas
corpus. The witness denied that he had
| suspended the writ. He was asked: DO
lou approve or disapprove the act OF
your Attorney General In that particular?
/ The witness would not answer, and
long discussion between the members OF
| the committee ensued
Mr. Hay contended that the witness
should answer. He strongly criticised the
| Governor, by inference for evading ire
question.
The witness said: 81 never, in any proc
lamatior, used the expression suspend the
writ of habeas corpus
Nor did you expressly use the words
martial law in any of your proclamations,
did you?" asked Mr.. Robertson.
We'll, ! sent troops in there
will you answer the question:"
Mr. Parker objected. But the witness.
at length, said that no formal declaration
OF martial law had ever been made.
Then the martial law that exist and
which still exists in Idaho is simply by an
Interpretation of your proclamation setting
forth that an insurrection existed?
Objection was made and Mr.. Lentz said
that if the witness were not compelled to
answer that question, yes or no, he would
consider the investigation farce.
Mr. CLANCY argued that the question
ought not TO be answered. He contended
that the very act of calling out troops was
a declaration OF martial law.
Mr.. Lentz took issue on this point, and
said that there was no martial law ct Chi
cago, at PitIsburg, or at HaZleton when the
Federal troops we're sent there. He said
this witness is equivocatng and equivo-
eating" Mr.. Parker interjected that is
not n fair statement" Mr.. Lentz, con-
tinuing. said the record will show that
my accusation against this witness is just
Republicans stood Together.
The Republican members OF the GQmmlt
tee voted that the question need not be
answered.
When the troops forced men at the
point of the bayonet TO work, did they do
it at your suggestion, or under your au-
thority?"
II was not present
But don't you know whether you in
structed the military authorities to do
this?"
We'll, as said, was not there
Mr.. Cox grew impatient by reason of the
said it was clear the Governor did not want
TO answer. Mr.. Cox said he would vote to
make the witness answer in a responsive
manner
Has the executive of your State any
authority to continue martial law when the
courts have been re-established and are
performing their functions without inter
ruption or molestation?''
II don't know
hot hon
1000 Federal troops are still in the Occur
d'Alene district, and that though the
courts are in operation that martial law
prevails there yet. The witness could not
tell how much longer he would seek to
keep the troops there. He said the insur-
rection was not suppressed. but he could
point TO no instance of lawlessness that
has occurred in the district since April %,
1899. He said the insurrection was not
suppressed and gave as his definition Of
'Insurrection" that lit is a conspiracy or
an effort to defy the county authorities"
Can You name any insurrectionist in
that district"
NO, SIR
"If there are insurrectionists there why
don't you arrest them?'
"Oh, well, it's al! only waiting to break
| out"
Then because there was a riot at one
| time there may be another you are justi-
fed in maintaining martial law"
Yes, sir"
do you not maintain martial law to
| maintain the permit SYSTEM"
"Oh, no."
Gould you maintain the permit system
| without the troops?'
| Il do not know
/ Did you ever suggest to the War De
partment that martial law might be with
drawn, and that the troops might be al
| lowed 10 remain"
Il never did
! At one point In the enquiry. where Mir
| CLANCY made an objection, Mr. Hay took
| him severely 10 task. saying. Il protest
| against counsel making objections and re-
| peatedly suggesting answers to the wit
ness"
The Governor was asked If he had au-
| thorized Sinclair to issue a proclamation
| forbidding the use of a certain highway to
| citizens of Wardner. who We're on their
| way to cemetery?
| At first a direct answer could not be
forced from the witness. but after a lapse
of time the Governor said that the nth
| of July parade was prohibited, because on
| previous occasions violent speeches had
| been made.
Gould you not have told these people
| that they would not be allowed to make
speeches, under pain OF DISPERSAL"
Yes, l could have done that, but I
thought | would go further
You thought you would control and rule
those people without warrant Of law or
| right, Just as your will dictated?"
| Put It that way if you choose
Mr. Robertson pursued line of ques-
lions to show that -four and meat were
| furnished to the Federal troops in Sho-