Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-02-25

g
places on the committee only by authori-
ty of their membership in the Congress.
He urged that the functions exercise
had previously been the work OF the
Congress and had only been relegated to
its committee for convenience. and that
the exercise OF the functions was still
the work of the Congress and therefore
purely legislative.
Attorney Frank L. Elder, representing
the government printing office. pointed
out to the court that the duties of the
committee on printing are not ministerial.
because they do not enter into the con-
tracts awarded, but are merely advisory.
In this connection. he said, they exer-
cised discretion i'll recommending desir-
able bidders and claimed that in the ex-
ercise of their functions they are indie
pendent OF the courts.
Acted as Congress- Members.
The plea of lack of Jurisdiction. made
by Attorneys George Z. Hamilton, John
W. Yerkes and Frank Z. Elder. is based
on the claim that the three respondents,
Allen T.. Cooper, George c. SturS SIS and
David L. Finley, are members of the
House of Representatives and in attend
ance upon a session of the Congress: that
IN the performance of their duties as
members of the committee on printing
they acted and could only act as members
OF Congress. and were responsible only to
the legislative branch of the government,
whose performance of It's legislative func-
tonS is independent of control by any
other branch of the government.
The House members further declare
that the committee is made UP exclusively
of members of Congress and that the
duties imposed on them are necessary to
the legislative branch of the government.
In IF heir duties fhav claim
10 have been invested with discretion,
being required TO award contracts Ito the
lowest and best bidder for the interests
of the government.
acknowledging the jurisdiction of the
court, the House members in form of a
demurrer attack the right of the Valley
Paper Company to the redress asked In
its petition for a mandamus. They
poilst out alleged defects in the bid sub
nitted and call attention to the fact that
the company does not allege that its bid
was the lowest and best for the interests
If the government. They repeat the
claim not to have been acting in min
iSterial capacity, but to have been exer-
cising discretion and judgment to the
best interests of the government.
The matter of the demurrer was post
Of jurisdiction is rendered
Argument Against Jurisdiction.
The return and answer of Messrs- Coop
er, Sturgiss and Finley, So far as it re-
lates to the jurisdiction of the court and
their constitutional privileges as mem
bers of Congress, is as follows:
ITO the petition filed in this cause
praying for writ of mandamus and to
the rule to show cause issued thereon
Your respondents, Allen F. Cooper.
George C. Sturgiss and David E. Finley,
members of the joint committee on print
ing OF Congress, averring that they are
now and have been since the LIST of De-
cember 1909 and prior thereto mem
bers Of The House of Representatives of
the Congress of the United States and
members of the joint committee on print
ing of Congress, and for the purpose first
of pleading to the Jurisdiction of this
court respectfully represent:
list. That this court has no jurisdic-
ton in this proceeding, for the reason
that they are members of the House of
Representatives of the Congress OF the
United States and in attendance upon a
session of said Congress. that in perform
snce OF their duties as members of said
committee on printing these respondents
acted and could only act as members OF
Congress; that by their appointment to
ceived and could have received no Office,
took no oath OF office as members of said
Joint committee, and their duties as men,
bers of the legislative department of this
EONtfiIltIlt were neither IeSSenSu nor IN
creased. anw for their acts they are re-
spoons BILE and accountable alone to the
legislative body which created said COM
mittee: and that Congress in the per-
formance of its legislative functions is
independent of control by any other
branch of the government.
That the work of said committee lis
necessary and essential to the proper
conduct of leg slative business. and this
committee, made up of members Of Con-
= sirnpIV - n of
Congress in the performance of duties
necessary to the legislative branch and
department of the government, That as
members of this committee they are per-
forming the duties Of the House of Rep
resentatives, and duties of members Of
that House, which duties were imposed
upon them by Congress in pursuance Of
its legislative policy 10 keep under its
own control public printing. That this
committee is merely the organ of the
legislative will, and these respondents, as
members OF this committee, are solely
and alone the representatives of the leg
islative body of the government, and re-
sponsible only 10 that branch for their
conduct and acts.
Privileged Under Constitution.
-. They respectfully represent that
these respondents, by appointment as
members of the joint committee on print
Ing, were vested only with the power that
Congress might lawfully confer upon its
members as representatives serving on a
committee of Congress, and were author
ICED to exercise their discretion in the
matter of awards on paper proposa by
awarding contracts to the lowest and
best bidder for the interests of the gov
eminent
That these respondents are advis I'd
that because of their constitu ,ional priv
ilege and constitutional immunity, fur
Their proceedings or order on this petition
would be Intellectual from the lack OF
Jurisdiction or power of enforcement,
and therefore. the rule should be dis
charged. and this petition should be DIS
missed"
still relying on their plea and objection
TO the ju isdiction OF the court and not
waving the same, the respondents CON-
tend that the petition should be dismissed,
for the following reasons:
tal That tx does not allege that the petit
TONER was the lowest and best bidder for
the interests of the government
(bl That even though these respondents,
IN acting as compla ned OF, were acting in
= ministerial capacity. which. however Is
denied, their acts. nevertheless, involved
the exercise Of discretion and Judgment,
and the Interpretation of the law Great
ing said joint COMMITTEES on printing, and
their duties Hereunder.
tcl That the petition discloses that the
wards had been made by the committee
before the fling of this suit. and the peti-
tiOnsr has his ADEQUATE remedy at Law IN