The San Francisco call., 1905-02-10

opportunity TO be heard IN my own QeIenSe.
The trend Of the argument here tends to
show that l have been prejudged guilty.
But in conclusion Will appeal to you and say:
do unto others ye would be done by
LUKENS' RESOLUTION.
When Belshaw's report calling upon
the Senate for instruction was intro
duced Luxens of Alameda moved that
the same be taken up for immediate
consideration. The motion carried and
he Immediately introduced the follow
ing:
Whereas, The special committee OF five ap-
pointed by the Senate Of California on the Seth
day OF January, A. ID. 1905, to Investigate the
charges contained in the affidavit of William
CoTbin. sworn by him the 27th day OF January,
1909. before Harry J. Lask. Notary Public.
Senate OF California on Monday, January 30.
1908, has reported and presented to the Senate
for its instructions resolution herein quoted:
be II
Resolved That. in order completely to
Nndicate justice. the said special committee
is hereby directed and instructed not TO ad-
minister an oath and examine any of the said
Senators Hereunder to any fact or act in
connection with any of the matters contained
mentioned
SIMPSON ON THE FLOOR.
Senator Shortridge suggested that
the form of the resolution be changed
so as to make it declarative question
when it came to the vote striking out
the word Not in the last paragraph,
so when the vote was called for the
ayes would declare for the swearing
OF the accused and the noes against
it, instead of the reverse, as would
be done in event the resolution went
in unamended. The call for the ques-
tion brought Senator Simpson, a mem
Der of the investigating committee,
forward with substitute resolution,
which follows:
Whereas. 1t appears that in course of the in
vestigation now pending before a special COM
Hlttee OF the senate, IN the matter of certain
Senators accused of receiving bribes, that GER
tain ones Of said Senators have presented
themselves before said committee for the pur-
pose OF being sworn and testifying wit
nesses. and
Whereas. If said investigation is to continue
II VIII be in violation of the commonest prin-
ciples Of human liberty to deny to any of said
Senators the right 10 be sworn and testify,
and
Whereas, The maximum penalty which can
be imposed by the Senate in case of the further
prosecution Of said charges and the conYc-
tion of said Senators hereunder is simple ex
pulslon from the senate, and II they are
sworn as witnesses and give testimony such
in said investigation they become thereby alb
solved from any criminal prosecution, and
Whereas. Said penalty is inadequate to meet
the gravity OF said charges but that under
the criminal laws and constitution of the State
there are adequate penalties which, in of
conviction in the courts Of the land include
deprivation OF office and Imprisonment for fel-
OnE. ana
Whereas. The District Attorney Of sacra-
mento County is nov preparing with the Grand
Jury Of said county to commence prosecution
OF said charges IN due course OF criminal law,
which would be defeated by any further in
Vestigation by the Senate under rules of COM
mon decency. not TO mention law, that is to
say. by any further investigation at which any
of said accused Senators should give testimony
under OATH they having refused otherwise to
make any statement. Now. therefore be it
Resolved. That further, investigation of
said charges be had by this Senate and that
and the is hereby discharged in order
that the charges mentioned may be tried in
the due and orderly course of criminal law
and the guilty ones. il any, be brought to
adequate punishment.
This resolution" said Shortridge,
should not pass. 1t is naught but an
argument that may tend to influence
the vote of the Senators on this grave
question that confronts u.s."
STANDS BY RESOLUTION.
Lukens wanted to know if Simp-
sons resolution had the concurrence Of
his associates on the committee but
Shortridge protested against an an
swer being given, saying the question
was highly improper. President An
derson ruled otherwise, however, and
said he saw absolutely no impropriety
in the question, and Simpson answered
j
ton to his colleagues on the committee.
Belshaw said that, while he felt SiInp-
sons resolution was not germane to the
question under discussion, it's adop-
tion would be an injustice to the COM
mittee, in that it would prevent a
further consideration of the charges
against the accused. He said he would
like to have Simpson withdraw his res
olution, that the whole attention of
the Senate could be directed to a con-
sideration of the question of whether
the accused should be given the right
to testify.
Simpson refused to withdraw the
resolution, however, saving he did not
think it right that the accused should
be denied the right of hearing; that
if the Senate voted to refuse the right
to the accused to appear in their own
behalf 1t would be saying to them:
Your accusers have had their day in
court and have proved their case. but
II is not for you to be given the priv.
ilege of hearing. You must get out
of court"
Senator Anderson said he did not
see how the committee could stay its
investigation at this time. Gator, for
the defense, had said last night that
he had other witnesses to testify and
that further than this the Senate had
no means of knowing whether or not
the accused might not decide later to
take the stand and make statements
not under oath, which action would in
no way immune them from prosecu-
ton in event they are later found to
be guilty.
DUTY OF SENATE.
Lukens said that his view of the
situation was that but one question,
the duty Of the Senate to the State.
was involved. The courts, he
said, had been established through
wise system for the protec-
ton of society and he did
not believe the Senate should take any
action that would tend to prevent an
infiiction on the guilty of the pains
and penalties that would follow con-
viction. He did not mean to prejudice
the accused, he said in conclusion,
but it was plain that if the Senators
charged were guilty then the Senate
was powerless to infiict upon them
punishment to the crime; that all it
could do was to expel the accused If
they were found guilty.
Senator Curtin here entered the ar