Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-06-21
i. SNOWDEN MARSHALL
GUILTY OF CONTEMPT
Charges Against District Attorney
Sustained in House by Vote
of 2OS to 81.
HE CRITICIZED SUBCOMMITTEE
Sergeant-at-Arms Ordered to Bring
Him Before Bar-Outgrowth of
Impeachment Proceedings Started
by Representative Buchanan.

WASHINGTON. June 2o.-Contempt
United 'tates district attorney of New
York. because of his criticism Of a
House subcommittee. were sustained by
the House to-day by vote Of 2oS TO
50. and tho scrccant-at-arms was or
dered 70 take Marshall into custody
aud bring him before the har OF tho
House.
The action Is the outgrowth Of inn
pea chment proceedings brought against
Mr. Marshall By Representative Ruch-
anan, of Illinois The subcommittee
which investigated them. and whose
motives he impunged also recommends
ed against impeachment.
Speaker Clark probably Will issue Il
warrant tomorrow, bu, some OF Mr.
MarshaII's friends said tonight he
might anticipate its service and appear
voluntarily.
Although House leaders have indi-
Gated they would be satisfied wth a
public reprimand. more severe pun
ishment, including Imprisonment. might
ne imposed y vote on that question
Will be taken later.
An all-day debate preceded tho vote
to-day. Representative Moon. of Ten
nessee, chairman Of select commit
tee. which investigated tho contempt
charges. leading the fight against Mr..
Marshall. He declared tho district at
,orney had offered an Outrageous in
suit" TO the House. Representatives
Garner. of Texas: Webb Of North Caro-
lima. and other members said failure
to sustain the charges would consti-
tute a reputation OF the subcommit
tee and an Endorsement of Mr Mar
sha!rs attack on II.
DEFENSE OFFERED
n> SE\EHAi. MEMBERS
Representative Graham. OF Pennsyl-
vania. defending the district attorney,
SAID the subcommittee had opened a
publicity campaign 10 which Mr.. Mar
shalls statements were but the natural
reply Of an indignant man. The sub
committee had erred. he said, in open
ing hearings in New YORK and in try
ing 10 obtain information from MEM
bers OF the grand jury there Repre-
senta,!ves Montague, Of Virginia, and
sherley, OF Kentucky. also defended
Mr.. Marshall
The vote was noupartisan
The impeachment proceedings were
started 81 Representative. Buchanan,
after the district attorneys tnvestiGa-
ton OF the alleged unneutral activities
Of Labo-s National Peace Council.
which resulted in th. indictment OF
Representative Buchanan and others.
Charges against Marshall related to
the general conduct OF mis- Office and
particularly his conduct Of the Rae
Tanner perjury case.
Contempt charges were preferred
he c-rgr ~ IN u.ri n
a letter TO the Investigating subcon-
mittee branding lis work rs irregular
and extraordinary" and declaring II
was attempting to protect membe,
OF Congress by running a district at
,orney.
one OF the speeches made in defense
Of Marshall was delivered by Repre-
sentative Montague. OF Richmond, who
aid, in part;
There is no Law, direct or expressed.
authorizing this body TO administer
punishment for contempt. You have TO
go far afeld 10 find where this House
ever exercised the inherent power TO
punish criticism, oral or written. OF
its conduct. This Congress never has
punished anybody for oral or verbal
criticism of its conduct, or any sub
committee OF either body. The way
70 maintain the dignity OF this House
is not to assert the right of contempt.
but 20 disregard unjust and uutruthful
criticism and pursue courageously our
conduct as Representatives. Mr.. Mar
shall found this committee making in
dustrious efforts TO secure the evidence
before the grand jury of his court
evidence the making public OF which,
in my judgment would have been on
of the most disastrous misfortuncs that
ever has occurred in this country. It
is claimed the Congress can strike
down the barriers that separate the
legislative from the judicial branches
Of the government. When you do that
you may punish for contempt. but YOU
cannot save yourselves from con-
teuDt."