Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-02-07
conuressmen Summoned to
District Supreme Court.
RULE BY JUSTICE WRIGHT
Both Houses Refer Matter to Ju-
dietary Committees.
COURSE TO BE CONSIDERED
Controversy Over Action of Joint
Committee on Printing in Re-
jecting Bid for Paper.

A threatened clash between the SUI
ireme Court of the District of Columbia
md the Congress of the United States
VAS brought to the attention of the
House this afternoon. when Mr. Finley
Of South Carolina. rising to question
Of personal privilege, asked for advice
row to proceed in an order received from
he court.
He announced that the House members
If the joint committee on printing. hav-
ng charge of the opening of bids for
furnishing supplies to the government
printing office, had been served with a
notice from Justice Wright of the Su-
5reme Court Of the District to appear in
court and show cause why mandamus
should not issue against them to accept
the bid OF the Valley Paper Company of
Holyoke, Mass. for paper.
Mr.. Finley said that the House MEM
hcIs of the joint committee felt II would
lc a breach of the privileges OF the
House if they should, by accepting serv-
zee, admit the right of the court to ques-
iion the committees action. He present
ed a resolution directing the committee
on judiciary to report what action should
be taken by the members of the joint
committee in the premises.
This is the first time In the history
of the government" said Mr.. Finley.
that a committee Of Congress has ever
been sued and hope 1t will be the last.
Representative Clayton declared that 1t
was due to the independence of the
House and Senate to settle this question
He thought it would have been a decided
breach Of privilege of the Congress II
members of the joint committee had gone
into court.
The resolution was unanimously adopted.
Senate Also Acts.
The matter was also taken up in the
Senate, which instructed its committee
"a Judiciary, which includes many OF
the great lawyers Of the upper house, to
advise Senators Smoot, Bourne and
Fletcher In connection with the suit
against them as members of the joint
committee on printing, filed by the Val
icy Paper Company.
This was accomplished by the adoption
This morning by the Senate Of a resolution
offered by Senator Smoot.
After reciting the action of the Valley
Paper Company against the three sena-
tors for rejecting bids of the company,
tho resolution calls on the committee
On judiciary "to report what action the
Senate should take in the premises, and
particularly in the matter of instructing
the senators as to the course they should
pursue In the premises"
Under the law no member of Congress
may answer summons of any court to ap-
pear In court in regard to congressional
matter unless the branch of which he is
a member consents to his appearance.
Congress never has sanctioned commit
tee taking cognizance of proceedings such
as have been brought by the Valley Paper
Company, and, therefore. the courts have
never passed upon the question raised.
The indications are that Congress will
now ignore the appeal of the Massachu-
setts concern, whose bids were not con-
sidered because of informalities.
Paper Company's Complaint.
The rule complained of was laid by
Justice Wright last Wednesday, on the
comp laint of the Valley Paper Company
of Holyoke, Mass. 1t requires the men,
bers of the joint committee on printing
TO appear In court next Friday and show
cause why a writ of mandamus should
not be issued, to compel them to receive
and consider a bid of the company TO
furnish paper for printing.
The marshal served the rule on Sena-
tors Reed Smoot. Jonathan Bourne. jr.
and Duncan L. Fletcher. and Representa-
tive Allen +. Cooper last "Wednesday.
Representatives George G.. Sturgiss and
David T.. Finley were served the next
day.
The paper company asserts that its bid
was the lowest submitted, but was thrown
out because the certificate TO sutf1ciency
OF the surety offered was not attached to
the bid. The information was contained
in a separate paper.
Administrative Officers Summoned.
The Oldest clerks at the City Hall do
not recall the issuance of a similar rule
in mandamus against the members OF
Congress or a committee of that body,
but such rules against the other co-ordi-
nate branches of the government are of
almost daily occurrence. Mandamus pro-
ceedings against cabinet officers and other
administrative officials have been sus-
tanned by the United States Supreme
court on appeal.