Evening star., 1924-03-25
SENATE VICTOR IN CONTEMPT,
CHARGE CASE IN SUGAR PROBE
Stakeholder Sentenced to 80 Days in Jail and Fined
500 for Refusal to Tell If Senators Dealt
in Securities.

attorney for the District OF Columoia.
summoned the broker as witness a.
the trial, and much of the teolurn OIL
Chapman's Imprisonment was renew
ed by his attendancS in court. nave
meyer and Searles were acquitted.
Senator Henry Cabot Loogs oI
Massachusetts, was a member OF the
Senate sugar inquiry committee, OF
which Senator George Gray OF Dela-
ware was chairman. The questions
which Chapman refused to answer
were propounded by Senator Cush-
man X. Davis of Minnesota the oIher
members of the committee were sen
ator William Lindsay OF Ken ntucky
and Senator William V. Alien Oh We
braSka.
Senator Before Jury.
Chairman Gray appears to have
been the only member of the COM
mittee to appear before the grano
Jury and tell of the refusal OF Mr.
Chapman to answer questions. me-
name alone appears on the nack ol
the indictment as a witness pelots :
that body. If the same procedure Is
followed Chairman Dill Will pro ooao.y
go to the courthouse to tell the jury
Of the refusal of Mr., Sinclair TO an
swer the questions put TO MN ny
Senator Walsh of the committee.
Chief Justice Alvey, in his OPINION,
refers to two earlier incidents whers
the House of Representatives meted
out punishment to recalcitrant wit-
nesses One of these cases was ia
fused to answer questions, and the
other was the case OF Hailett MI,
bourn, who, in 1876, was committed
to prison by order or the touse ot
REPRESENTATIVES for refusing ope,
oience to d subpoena duces tecunl anu
declining to answer query.
KiIbourn later brought civil SUIT
against the sergeant-at-arm or the
House for false imprisonment and re-
covered verdict for $lo'Oeo dam
ages. The United States Supreme
Court. in that case, held the order or
the House OF Representatives, dectar,
ing kilbourn in contempt was Nolo
and afforded no protection TO the ser
geant-at- in an action Tor ia1se
Imprisonment.
Congress, Powers Defined.
The inquiry involved in the kilbourn
case was into the alleged existence
of a real estate pool in the District,
and if Jay Cooke & Co., who were
debtors OF the United States. and
whose affairs were then in the bank
ruptcy court, had an interest in the
pool or were creditors of 1t.
The United States Supreme Court
held that there exists no power in
Congress, or in either branch, on an
allegation that an insolvent deDtor
of the United States was interested
Investigate the affairs of that part
nership and consequently there was
no authority in the House to compel
a witness to testify on the subject.
Section I02, under which the alleg-
ed contempt of Sinclair will be prose-
cuted, embodies the provisions of an
act passed by Congress as far back
as 1857. The power to punish for con-
tempt, however, is inherent in Con-
gress, Chief Justice Alvey pointed out
in his decision, and the act of 1857
only prescribed additional pains and
penalties to those already existing.
John W. Mccartney, a Washington
broker, was also indicted for con-
tempt in connection with the sugar
inquiry and his appeal was argued
in the Court of Appeals with the Chap
man case. No sentence was ever i'm
posed in the Mccartney case. it is
said.