Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-04-27
Members of Congress Not
Privileged to Assassinate
Private Character.
SUBSTANCE OF REPORT
ON GLOvER-SIMS CASE
Immunity of Lawmakers for Words
Spoken in Debate Also Made
Prominent.

Although the Glover-Sim report 10 tho
mouse OF Representatives is loaded to the
ennwaies with reasons why a plain citi-
zen should not slap a congressman's face
Tor words spoken in debate" the repor,
also bears short but sharp reminder TO
members OF the national legislature that
IL would be we'll to remember that the
country at large will not tolerate the
ASSASSINATION OF private character by
congressman. cloaked as they are with
unlimited immunity from action at Law.
This portion of the report is almost over
shadowed BY the long citations OF prece-
dents and suits from the highest court In
the land. but nevertheless IL quotes from
justice of the Supreme Court who hoios
out solemn warning against any men,
Der OF Congress who might run amuck
with his defamation OF private char
acter. simply because the Constitution
gives him the privilege of not being held
accountable for his words. in the pursuit
OF public business. on the floor OF House
or Senate
The committee also believes, says
the report. that i'm reporting on such a
grave subject II ought to say that while
freedom of speech and debate is a great
vital privilege. and without that freedom
10 an unconditional extent all the other
privileges OF either Of the houses OF
Congress would be practically ineffect-
uaf. yet the very existence and extent
or the privilege demands the greatest re-
strafnt in it's exercise. No man. even
under the cloak of public necessity and
parliamentary power. ought to have the
right wantonly to defame another
Justice Story Quoted.
The report quotes Justice Sorry:
Every citizen has as good a right 20
be protected by the laws from malignant
scandal. false Charges and defamatory
imputatfon as a member of Congress has
to utter them in his seat. IL II were
otherwise mans character might be
| taken away, without the possibility OF
redress. either BY malice or indscretion
or self-conceit OF a member OF Congress
The House of Representatives is
vitality concerned with the safeguard
ing Of its privileges and the preser-
walton OF it's Legislative integrity and
dignity. IL is just as seriously con-
cerned. however. with the maintenance
OF auch q course Of conduct on the
part of each of its Individual members
as Will assure to every citizen In the
land protection from defamation on
the floor of the House. The power or
| the House over its members Is OF the
croadest character. The breach of the
gives the House ample power or pun
fshment. 1t must come to be under
stood, therefore. that as the privileges.
in so far as the. public is concerned.
will be enforced by prompt punish
ment for contempt in the event OF
their breach. the House, I'm the future
as often I'm the past. will also fully
protect all citizens from unjust as
! saults upon their character by censure
or, other punishment administered TO
an offending member.
Completeness Of Immunity.
The report states that a member OF
Congress shall enjoy immunity as long
as he lives for words spoken I'm the
House or in any OF its committees.
This complete immunity" says the
report. guarantees exemption from
questioning not only within. but also
without the courts. Obviously. if one
may not question a member for words
spoken in debate under the processes
OF law. he cannot do SO by taking the
law in his own hand"
In citing the precedents which were
studied by the committee before max
ing its exhaustive report. the com
mittee gives as one conclusion that
an assault. upon a member of the
House for words spoken In debate is
a breach of. the privileges and a con-
tempt OF the House.
Conclusions of the Committee.
Then the report states:
This has not only been the uniform
opinion of the House of Representatives
from the earliest times. but is necessa lily
true because OF the reasons which lie at
the foundation of the constitutional pro-
vision 1t was conceived that absolute
freedom of speech and OF debate in the
f;aI h..
public welfare. and it was intended that
the voice of a member, and of his con-
stituents speaking through him. should
not be si.enced by any fear of legal or
personal consequences. A member OF
course may plead his constitutional privi-
lege in bar OF any action based upon his
utterances, but unless his person is like
wise immune from attack for the same
cause. the purpose OF the Constitution
would be but half accomplished.
"Nor is the House as a collective whole
less concerned in preserving this freedom
of debate than are the individual member
and his constituency. In order that the
final action of any deliberatfve body may
represent the joint WISDOM OF it's MEM
bers there must be unrestrained exchange
of thought and opinion. and whatever
tends to silence one subtracts just SO
much from the efficiency of the whole. A
breach of a members privilege of uncon-
ditional freedom of debate therefore re-
acts upon the House: and the House I'm
treating il as a contempt against itself,
does so with no desire to magnify its
Office nor to yindicate its wounded dig
nifty, but to preserve and defend its legis-
lative integrity and power OF this legis-
lative integrity and power IL is the sole
guardian. and ii may at all times protecr
that integrity and power by appropriate
action taken for and by itself"
The report gives the account or other
events Of exciting nature where congress-
men have been slapped or mauled by p-i-
vate individuals. all told in high-sounding
legal phraseology. to prove there are par
liamentary precedents for holding Glover
In contempt OF the House
Farragut Square Incident.
Coming down to the Farragut Square
incident the report says:
1T will be observed that the speeches
made by Representative Sims in the
House OF Representatives which furnish
ed the admitted provocation for this as
sault were delivered by him during the
Sixty-second Congress: but, while this
raises a question not discussed in earlier
precedents, IL does not change, In our
opinion, the status OF the case
'.It is obvious that the Constitution. in
providing that senators and representa-
tiyes shall not be questioned in any other
place for any speech or debate I'm either
House extends an immunity unlimited -