The Washington times., 1929-04-09
Sinclair Case Ruling
Gives Congress Wide
Range in Investigations
NJ vxyEWnUAnK n uNynNrSErrNySANJ
BY WILLIAM X. HUTCHINSON
Iaternational News servles

Iaternational News servIes
After q dve+year legal battle, the
power OF the United States Senate
to conduct legislative investigations
to compel testimony and to punish
recalcitrant Witnesses stood unchal-
lenged today following the Supreme
Courts decision ir the Harry r.
Sinclair case.
The high trihunaf's Slecision was
so sweeping IL convinced senate
leaders that either branch of Con.
gress has the constitutional author
ity to conduct Investigations almost
without restriction. Leaders on
Capitol Hill interpreted the courts
ruling as confirming the right Of
the House or Senate to inquire into
the administration of any division Of
the Federal Government, into the
operation of any existing law and
into the necessity OF legislation on
any subject
Decision Is Sweeping
The Sinclair decision marked the
second time in the last two wears
In. which the court has upheld the
Senate's power Of inquiry. Once
before, in the Nal Daugherty raze.
1t ruled the Senate could compel
testimony and subpoena papers IN
specific case. The decision meant
little since Daugherty's testimony
was no longer desired and he 1ao
DESTROYED the desired papers.
In Senatorial opinion, the courts
decision will stand as a guidepDst
in the contempt case against
Thomas w. Cunningham. q Piaila.
delphia Ware leader. who defied the
Reed slush fund committee. Cum
ningham's case has been appealed
to the Supreme Court on conten.
tons similar to those raised oy
Sinclair.
The broad scope Of Senatorial
Investigations was authorized by
the high court in these words:
Undoubtedly the Senate had power
to delegate authority to its com
mittee to investigate and report
what had been and was being done
by executive departments under the
leasing act. the Naval oil reserve
act and the Presidents order In
respect to the reserves and to make
any other inquiry concerning the
public domain"
Applies TO ANY Act
Congressional leaders pointed out
that this ruling would apply to al
most any inquiry within reason by
merely substituting some other
word for leasing. I 1t could apply
as well TO prohibition" act or ''in-
terstate commerce act.
similarly the high court decreed
that recalcitrant witnesses who
wish to escape Jail have but two
avenues to freedom. They TnuSt
prove either that Congress has no
power to legisiate on the snbiect
under inquiry or that a House or
senate COMMITTEES, by questioning
nm. is subjecting him to deliber-
ate persecution without any pur.
pose of enacting legislation.
sinclair made this contention, In
erect, and the court said: '"rhe
record does not sustain amelia nt'e
contention that the Investigation
was avowedly not in aid of lesis>
Another portion OF the decision
gave Congress the right TO investi-
gate subjects being simultaneously
heard in the Federal courts.
may be conceded the court
said that Congress Is without au-
thorIty TO compel disclosures for the
purpose OF aiding the prosecution OF
pending suits. but the authority of
that body, directly or through its
committees. TO require pertinent dis.
closures In aid OF its own constitu-
tlonal power IS not abridged because
the Information sought to be ELECTED
may also be of use in such suits"
On the whole. the men who handle
congressional inquiries were ''tickled
pink" by. the decision. They so de-
clared themselves regular Republic
ans, Insurgents and Democrats
and they believe the ruling has
cleared the way OF legal obstacles
for the prosecution Of future investi-
cations.