The Washington times., 1924-03-22
Continued from First Page)


question Of gravest importance, !"
Spencer said.
Spencer held that the committee
had only the power to call witnesses
in cases that involve our own &C.
tons. such as the qualification Of
a member Of Congress, expulsion
and impeachment trials.
II think we had better tend to
the 1O1 bills before this committee
rather than pursuing what I con-
slider a doubtful right" added
Spencer.
Senator Stanfield Rep.) Of Oregon
said witnesses ought first to be
examined whether they have infor-
nation pertinent to the inquiry be-
fore they are called in this investi-
CATION"
Sinclair's statement, in part, fol-
lows:
1T Is perfectly clear from the Ian
guage of the resolution that your
committee by reason Of any consti-
tutional power which it may pos
sess or by virtue of the resolution
under which 1t Is acting Is not now
engaged, nor could 1t be engaged, IN
an investigation with particular
reference to the protection Of the
rights and equities of the United
States and the preservation of its
natural resources; because the Sen.
ate, from whom you derive your au.
thority, has unanimously passed
upon all questions embraced within
that authorization and exhausted
whatever power or authority it had
in the premises.
1T is further perfectly clear that
the Congress and the President have
made of the whole matter a judicial
question, determinable solely by the
courts Of the country, and such ques.
ton is now actually pending in the
district court Of the United States
for the district Of Wyoming, and
whatever criminal act is claimed Is
about to be Investigated by a spe.
cial grand Jury of the District of
/ Columbia.
Denies Their Authority.
with due respect to your COM
mittee l claim that you are without
any jurisdiction to question me fur
ther regarding the procurement of
the lease or the validity thereof or
any fact or circumstance pertaining
thereto; that such an examination
Of me by your committe would not
only be clearly outside of your
jurisdiction. but would be, in effect,
an examination before trial in a
civil action between the Government
and the company 1 represent, by n
body of men wholly unauthorized
by law and in a wholly unauthor-
lied manner. Or, II your examina-
ton should be directed toward elicit.
ing facts concerning fraud or cor.
ruption your committee in effect
would have constituted itself a
grand jury as to a matter which
Congress and the President, by
joint resolution 81, have directed
should be presented to the constitu
tional authorities of the country"
| The vote to compel Sinclair to
| testify was unanimous.
Sinclair Immediately took the
stand.
Senator Adams Dem.) of Colo.
RADIO, formally made the motion that
the committee call Sinclair.
| Senator Bursum Rep) Of New
Mexico offered an amendment for.
bidding the committee to question
| OAuCAdH dDOuL ally 1udIIGI uO"
pending in courts"
Refuses to Answer.
| When Sinclair concluded, Walsh
asked Sinclair about testimony
given previously by Fred G. Bon.
fills. editor Of the Denver Post.
| II decline to answer on advice of
counsel" replied Sinclair.
Walsh shot numerous questions
| at Sinclair, who sat conversing with
his counsel, Martin w. Littleton.
Invariably, the oil man replied, 81
decline to answer on the advice OF
| counsel and on the same ground as
given in my statement"
Questions Put To Him.
Sinclair refused to answer ques
tons concerning the $4,000 loan
| to ex.Secretary of the Interior
Albert B. Fall; his 100000 con
tract with the so-called Midwest
group; and the report of a dona
ton Of $4,000 shares Of Sinclair
stock to Will H. Hays, former chair
man Of the Republican National
Committee.
I will now put in the record
what 1 understand he would have
answered about these questions, y
-etorted Walsh.
II protest." interjected Martin w
Littleton, Sinclair's attorney 81
think that would be an outrage"
After a tilt between Walsh and
Littleton Walsh said he would not
press ito put these facts into the
record"