The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1907-07-30
hOLLOY PROBE
Gets QUIETUS
Special Committee Receives
Daggett's Opinion on
/ Power Under
Resolution.
(UBIECT IS TOO General
Field of Inquiry Provided
Not Made Specific
Enough in
Vote.
ANT COMPEL WITNESSES
Objections That Would Hold
In Attempt To Ques-
ton Unwilling
Subjects.
|AN'T COMPEL WITNESSES

# AT the meeting of the special COM
Nhittee appointed to consider Alderman
Tolloy's resolution for probing the city
finances, an executive session held in
Fifty hall hast evening, Chairman W.
Perry Curtiss presented to the mem
ers the opinion of Corporation Coun-
#el Daggett on the powers and stand
Ehg of committee appointed by the
hoard under the resolution. In sub
&tance the opinion holds that such a
Committee could not conduct an ef-
ective investigation under the resolu-
fon, firstly, because the resolution fails
b state specifically the subject matter
fthe inquiry and is too general in
Mcope, and secondly because legal OBJ
xections could be raised as to whether
Ehe subject matter was one which the
%oard was entitled to investigate, whe-
&her the committee was properly au-
&horized to make the inquiry and whe-
Rher the witness could be compelled to
2nswer the requisite questions in a
&ourt of law.
In regard to the compelling of cor
orations to bring their accounts and
ooks before the committee for an in
estigatlon the opinion states that
hese concerns are governed by state
hws and cannot be compelled to do Sc
Except under state provision. On this
4 opic the opinion reads: 1.-THE power
I a committee of your board to in
pect corporate books and papers must
bear some analogy to the power of a
( ourt to do the same. The courts are
OF, except as they are specifically au.
horized to do so, empowered to make
r UGH inspections"
In substance the opinion says:
You request my opinion upon the
uthority and powers that such a com.
hittee would have and especially
whether it could employ counsel, sub.
oena individuals and force them tc
nswer questions relating to their pres.
y mt property holdings and compel of.
GERS Of corporations to produce for the
Inspection Of the committee the books
nd papers of such corporation.
There is no legal limitation upon the
ower of the board to inform itself Of
E acts and to make recommended ton:
hereon. Such power is not limited ev
n to the many subjects over which
y he board is by law given jurisdiction
Assuming that the members of tn,
BOARD are ready and willing to Civ,
heir attention to subject matte
which is not within its Jurisdiction, NJ
me has occasion to question such ac
. ion until the board or some one by it
authority assumes by a. formal orde
10 compel or restrain the acts of som
4 ity officer or other person.
4 IF special committee should at
Tempt to enforce the presence or testi
lony of an unwilling witness it is con
Z eiyable that there might be at leas
hree questions raised, namely: First
- the subject matter one upon whic,
The board of aldermen may legally re
4 uire information? Second, is the com
ntttee properly authorized to max
uch inquiry? Third, is the questio
Asked or the information sought sue
S the witness would be compelled t
Lnswer or disclose in a court of law?
'It seems to me necessary Incl
ent Of such system that a committe
hall have for consideration specifi
ubiects of inquiry. A form of refer
nee which leaves to a committee tn
Investigation Of no specific subjet
halter does not seem to authorize
o ask specific questions of a reluctar
vitness and l believe it necessary t
\ she compulsion of testimony that witt
n reasonable limits, the specific fiel
f inquiry should be defined by tn
Ioard
"The reference proposed in Alderma
= folloy's petition does not seem
{ meet this requirement"
Furthermore the opinion states tht
witnesses summoned by the committt
Who had been liable to give in a swor
ak list and were asked questions cor
erning their taxable property migl
Iecline to answer on the ground thu
heir answers might tend to incrimii
tie themselves.
Summing up Mr.. Daggett sets fort
hese two points of specific advice:
"First the failure to define specii
ally the subject matter of inquiry
fair, and in my opinion, legal ol