The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1917-04-23
POWER OF
CONGRESS
DENIED
Had No Authority to Punish
Marshall for " Alleged
Contempt"

Washington. April 2S.-The house of
representatives which went out OF
ofice March 4. last. the supreme court
decided today. did not have authority
to punish United States Atty. H.
Snowden Marshall of New York for
alleged contempt. Mr.. Marshall is
exempt from further proceedings.
Contempt of the house of repre-.
sentatives was charged against United
States District Atty. H. Snowden Mar
shall OF New York. The house passed
a resolution June 20 last. finding him
in contempt for writing letter.
criticizing a house judiciary sybcom-
mittee in its investigation Of impeach-
ment charges made against him Dec.
II. 1915, by Representative Buchanan
OF Illinois. Speaker Clark issued a
warrant of arrest for service by
Sergeant-at-arms Robert 3. Gordon.
The habeas corpus proceedings fol-
lowed and were expedited so that in
case of a decision against Mr.. Marshall
he could be brought before the bar"
OF the house before congress ended
March 4.
Authority of the house to act as a
court and punish contempts of its
privileges was denied by Mr.. Marshall
in his habeas corpus suit against the
serReant-at-arms. Federal Judge
Hand Of New York dismissed the suit
July 81, ordered Mr.. Marshall into
custody Of the sergeant-at-arms to ap-
pear before the house for punishment,
and released the district attorney upon
his own recognizance pending the SUI
preme courts decision upon his APP
peal.
That power to puNish contempts is
necessary and inherent to the houses
OF congress in exercise OF their consti-
tutional functions was contended by
attorneys representing the housed.
Cady Herrick and former Rep. Martin
w. Lttleton and Henry M. Goldfogle
Of New York.
Representative Buchanan impeached
Mr.. Marshall for alleged misconduct |
and neglect Of duty in the Oliver |
Osborne-Rae Tanner and other cases, |
Just two weeks before Mr.. Buchanan |
and others concerned with Labor's |
National Peace party were indicted by |
a New York federal grand jury in con-
nection with an alleged conspiracy to |
foment strikes in American munitions |
factories. Representative Buchanan is /
upon bail awaiting trial.
In the subsequent Impeachment in |
by Representative Carlin /
Of Virginia. Gard Of Ohio and Nelson
Of Wisconsin, a judiciary committee,
MIR. Marshall wrote the letter to Chair
man Carlin which the house adjudged
Bad faith in the sub
inquiry was charged.
Il realized that your effort was to
ruin me-" the letter stated. land my
ofice by publishing with your full ap-
prevail the complaints Of various per-
sons who have run afoul of the
criminal law under my administra-
:ion."
Another passage declared: >'T re-
garded a member of congress who
would take money for an unlawful
purpose from any foreign agent as a
traitor : and it was incompre-
1ensible how your honorable subcom-
nittee should rush to the assistance OF
IN indicted defendant; how you had
resolved to prevent
by causing the district at
.orney in charge to be publicly
;landered."
That he told New York newspa-
oerman that Representative Carlin ,
vas travelling around with Buchan-
ms counsel Walsh and David Slade,"
vas also stated by Mr.. Marshall in his ,
etter, also expressing belief that the !
investigation was not in i
rood faith"
The judiciary committee later rec ,
to the house that no fur :
her action be taken In the impeach-
nent charges. This is still pending ,
o be awaiting the outcome of the
labeas corpus case.
Before the supreme court, counsel !
or Mr.. Marshall former Sen. John G.
Spooner. Charles p. Spooner and form
n Assistant Attorney Gen. Jesse c.
Adkins, contended that the district at
orney should be released. They as
Ierted that the constitution does not
rive congress the express Dower-and
t should not be implied-to punish
;ontempts. Thew insisted that such a
'uling would subject critics of con-
.ressional acts. including private
Individuals and newspaper publishers,
o contempt punishment. although
hey conceded congressional power to
nforce strictly constitutional authori-
v.
Precedents dating back to 1875 were
tied by attorneys for the house in
support of the contempt punishment
,ower. They contended the impeach- :
nent Investigation was a judicial pro-
eeding and that inability Of congress
O punish contempts would lessen the t
aspect Of the people for and cause 6
hem to lose confidence in our form Of I
"