Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-01-19
Senator Rayner's Resolution
Killed in the Senate.
DIVISION ON PARTY LINES
MARYLAND Senator After Facts About
Canal Libel Case.
HAS ARGUMENT WITH KNOX
Former Attorney General Says to
Call for the Information Would
Set Dangerous Precedent.

By a strictly party vote Senator Ray
ner's resolution directing the Attorney
General to inform the Senate whether
the investigation brought by the district
attorneys Office in several federal dis
trictS. including the District OF Column
bia. in connection with publications in
the press concerning the purchase of the
Panama canal were ordered by the Presi-
dent and under what statute he is pro-
ceeding. was referred to the Judiciary
committee this afternoon. Mr.. Rayner
made another appeal for its passage, and
was assisted by Senator Culberson of
Texas, the minority leader.
Only two republicans voted against the
reference namely, Knox of Pennsylvania
and Sutherland of Utah, who preferred to
see the resolution laid on the table. The
action of the Senate In referring the
resolution is tantamount to killing it,
Opposed by Knox.
Senators Rayner and Knox INDUCED in
an interesting legal argument before the
question reached a vote. After MI Ray
ner had said that he could See no reason
for the opposition to the resolution, be-
cause ii merely asked for information
and criticised the action of no official. Mr..
Knox took the floor and said that he
was opposed to the resolution. not because
ne Senate had no power to require the
Attorney General to answer. nor on ac-
| count of the terms in which it was
drafted, but because in his opinion its
passage would establish a dangerous
precedent.
The government" said Mr.. Knox. us
proceeding in one or more courts In a mat
ter charging citizens with violation of the
| law. 1t is the Presidents duty to enforce
| the law, and he is given an Attorney Gen
eral to help him. Ii l were the Attorney
General today ] should be constrained to
say that it would be contrary to the pub
| lie interest to give the information asked
| for in this resolution in advance of the
| trial of the case
The senator from Pennsylvania then
| told how. after he had announced a few
years ago that the government would be-
| gin the Northern Securities case, opin-
| ions had been expressed all over the coun-
| try that such action would not lie in the
courts.
He asked what effect the passage OF a
| resolution similar to the Rayner resou-
| ton would have had at that time. 1t GER
| tainly would have been out OF place.
Knox Quotes Authorities.
Mr.. Knox then had read brief quot
ing authorities tending to uphold the &C.
ton of the Attorney General in the pres
ent Investigations before the New York
Mr.. Rayner declared that these cases
| cited had no bearing on the matter in
hand. One Of them, he said, was a con-
vCtion under the old sedition laws, long
since repealed. Il will ask the senator
| from Pennsylvania" said Mr.. Rayner,
| whether there is d statute under which
| anybody can be sued for libeling the gov
| ernment?"
Il must be consistent" replied Mr..
| Knox, so l will say that l am not now
practicing law
Il take that as an admission, because
| if there was such statute the senator
would know of it and would tell me"
| retorted Mr.. Rayner.
Senator Culberson took the position
| that the investigation now under way
smacked Of a political prosecution.
The question to be determined. said
he is whether the Attorney General is
bringing this action in good faith against
Mr. Pulitzer of the New York World as
| private individual only, or for the dou-
BILE purpose of prosecuting for libel of the
government"
Several senator's. including Clapp of
Minnesota and Dolliver of Iowa. took
the position that the question of the law
in this case is entirely one for the courts
to decide and out of the province of the
Senate.
When Senator Rayner asked for the
ayes and nays on his resolution there
was easily a sufficient show of hands
Tn