Show STANFOR D RE I 1 1 I to ho file questions propounded by the DECISION the tho senator cai a nit be inquired to say whether mcay money war W Us hied ad to I 1 legislation dy by wesen d I 1 res less to the HERALD u THE commission the bra red ered by justice field in the netter SAN FRANCISCO aug 29 in the tile application of the pacific railroad faaili ond commission to compel senator stanford and other officers of the central pacific railroad Kail road to answer certain questions in regard to the expenditure of funds for the purpose of influencing legislation justice field leej of the U 8 supreme bourt court delivered today to day the opinion of the united states circuit court to the effect that the act ol 01 congress creating the commission improperly n invites the operation cooperation co of the courts in an inquiry that th it is not judicial djalal the opinion is 18 backed by de ide chiong and opinions of story marshall and taney upon limitation limitations of congressional authority and in effect void pirt part of the act referring to courts as unconstitutional the court therefore declines to maie make an order compelling the officers to answer thesues tiona and also 1 declines to inako make an order giving i the committee acc access eai 9 tot to the he books boobs of the various various construction construct io n companies SAN FRANCISCO aug 29 justice field of the united states supreme C court ourt delivered his opinion this mo morning rn in in the matter of the petition of ofilio tile pacific Il It ailway commission to compa 1 benatar leland stanford to answer certain questions relating to t the he central pacific railway management and particularly to explain certain vouchers of the railway company and whether any tiny money represented in certain unexplained vouchers was used to influence national or state legislation iLi tiou the matter was argued before justice field bitting sitting with unit united od states circuit judge sawder sawyer and united states district judges liona man and sabin last monday A 10 it day the chief question raised was to determine i ne the porter power of the tile railway commission to compel the witness in in question to answer their queries prior to rendering hie his decision justice field gave an elaborate and exhaustive review of the proceedings edings of the commission in con connection n with milli the tile aeao iLg the reUt ione n 6 of lie the par tic to the litigation lie ile then cave e the decision th as n follows fa ow the motion tor for a peremptory order upon the tile witness to answer tile interrogatories propounded b by y tho Ita kail ilay ft ay b has as been weli fully at argued 1 and eer y thine which could bo said in its favor favo r has lists been een ably presented by the united states attorney cither either in oral or printed arguin arguments rats in ili re s asting tile motion counsel for the respondent live have not confined themselves to the discussion of the propriety and arid decem sity of the I 1 interrogations ions and the mif fici ency of the ansu answers ere riven given lv by linn hill but they have assailed the validity oi of the act creating the commission to far as it authorizes an examination into tho tile private affairs of the directors officers and employee emp loyes of the central central pacific railroad Kail road company and arid confers a right to invoke alie lie power of the federal courts in fn aid of the general investigation directed impressed m with ith the tile gravity of tit the question prevented preen pren ted vie e have given to them a all I 1 tile consider consideration stion in our pow power r the pacific commission mi 1 I on created cited ir under i I 1 t the e a net ct 0 of I 1 Cong Tops of march larch ad 1887 is is not a judicial b body y it hoskess tos 11 kess no po viers it t can determine no right of covern government ent or of the corn parties I 1 lose adaire it investigates those rights vill remain lie of 0 ilu ludi dickal cial inquiry and determination as fully lly as IB though alio had never been created ind and aa as such in cuing I 1 ng its it report to the pr president ident of ats us action will mill not riot be even admissible as ev evidence of any of the matters mattere in investigated vesti gated it his is a i mere board ot of inquiry directed to obtain information upon poll certain malters and to report 11 the result of its hinves investigations I 1 igat ions to lie the president Prec ident also to lay the rame pam be bocolo iota con ercse acsa ip lp tile ho 1 progress 0 of i its ili air and in in the furtherance I 1 them it is in terms authorized to in vole tile aid AM of the courts of the united states ili in requiring attendance and te testimony of witt witness lesses and anti the tile production ithon of books paper papers and anti documents and the lite ait act provides that the circuit or district court of tho tile united states ft athin the lite juris H action of ia winch contumacy contu miry or refusal of libik an any person to obey a subpoena to liviu may ma v issue I 1 mje an ail order requiring fluvio li persona persons I 1 to appear before the coromis bitners nud and produce tile bools books and pai pa pers and give evidence touching tou thing I 1 ho he in question RIGHTS OF THE CITIZEN 1161 of all the rights of the citizen few fou arc are of if greater importance or r more cs e sentiel to his lii peace ind and happiness I 1 than is la the right of personal pere onil gurity and anti that involves not merely the ho pin protection I 1 of it his person from bault but I 1 the exemption of hie his private affairs I 1 book books and papers front the tion and scrutiny of oetters WI ettli 11 out tho lie of thia this rit tit all al other oilier rights would mould lwe we half their value the lw law lar provides for the compulsory prod nuion in in I 1 llie lie progress pro grees pf of judicial or by airet t suit for that kurpe of suen document documents as its effect the interest of others and ul alo ulo o in in certain cases for tile seizure of criminating paper papers nee et fary for prosecution fit of offenders public justice andona an and donl onla in in me of those wit was 8 can diey iliev be obi lined end and their contents made know knon n against 11 lie the wil will of the om owners nets in the dept care of loyd ve va the united stiles states 11 U 8 61 the su sit pr premo emo court held that the tile pro naion of a law of Conz Con grossm ross vi biah iiii h X court of ho the united states in in revenue cases on the motion of the attorney to require the government a defend ant or ait to lue in court llie his private books in in ind paper or the tile allegation of the attorney repot hect ing them should betaken be taken as confessed was aa and void As a plied lied to suits for penalties or to ert estt alli r atif ah h the forfeiture of a ir the court Ppe peaking by mr justice Ju itie bradley Brad loy said s kiil any compulsory lie dis co cover by the extortions extor tiona of the I 1 oath t b or compelling the product production loyt of ilia lit bookie and td to con cop vit vi ait t him of crime me or to forfeit his Z property er Y if I 1 contrary arr to the he principle pro ea of free government it id Is abhorrent nt to tho instincts a incas t of an american it ma may y euit suit the purpose u e of a despotic falli power hot but no not t the josph atmosphere ere 01 of I 1 political liberty or personal C freedom 1 the liing language page thus used had reference it is is true to the compulsory production of papers aa loun foundation dation for criminal proceedings P oa I 1 rigs but it ie is inapplicable to any such production of private book books and waa paper of a party otherwise than in in the e course of judicial proceedings or a direct euit suit for that purpose it is a forcible intrusion into and compulsory sot c kosure of ones private affairs ant and papers m without justice process orin or in lite t he course of judicial proceeding which m is contrary to principles of free government ment and is abhorrent to the instincts is of englishmen and americans in the case of vs thompson to wo we have the decision of the court of the united states that neither houses of congress had he the power pokier to make inquiries into the private affairs of citizens that is to compel tho the exposure of such affairs all airs th that A t case was this the tinn firm of J cook co were debtors of the united states and it was alleged that they were interested in a real estate pool in the city of washington Washingto nand and that the trustee of their estate and effects had made a settlement of their interests with the associates of the firm to the disadvantage and loss of numerous numero u F c creditors redi tors in including duding the govern government men t of the united states the house of ti tives ca by a resolution reciting these facts authorized the speaker to appoint a committee commit teo of five to inquire 1 into the matter and history of 1 the said real estate pool and the character of the tile settlement bett lement with amount of property involved in u which well J cook co m were ere interested and the amount paid or to be paid in the said settlement with the commissioner to bend for pe persons and papers and anti report to mons the house louse the tito waa was appointed and organized nud and prom proceeded eded to make the inquiry desired A subpoena was issued to one kilbourn command commanding Z him to appear before lie tile commission to and be examined touching the matter to be inquired into and to bring with him certain designated records papers and maps relating to the inquiry kilbourn appeared before the commission and was mas asked to state the names of five members of the real estate pool and where such filch resided ind and he refused tall to answer nemer the questions or to produce the books which ai hud been required the commission re reported arted the matter to the ilou houie anait and it ordered the speaker to issue hia ilia warrant marrant directing the per r geant at anns to arrest kilbourn and bring him before the bar of the house to answer why he should not be punished puni hed for contempt on being brought before louse kilburn persisted in his ilia refusal to answer the question and to produce the books and papers to required he ho was thereupon aa held er d to ho he in contempt and was committed to 0 the custody of the f ergeant sergeant at nt arms until ho he should signify his willing nii to appear before the Oom nion and ansu answer cr the question tio n and obey subpoena driehs and it was ordered that in lie tile meantime the at arme arms should cause him to be confined in the common cornmon jail of lie the district of columbia ho ile was accordingly confined in that ill jail it fur for forty live five days when lien lip it wa wae 9 released 0 on n a liavaa habeas corpus us by tho tile chief justice of the tile supreme ia ale r court of llie lite district of columbia upon his big release lie sued the speaker of the house members of the committee and segment at arms for his forcible arrest and an tito defendants pleaded the facts recited to which pleas tho the plain plaintiff tift demurred this demurrer was overruled ru led judgment was affirmed as to all till llie the defendants except the ser geant at arms they being members of the house were held beld to be I 1 pro protected of act from prosecution for their action but ns As to tit thompson om the judgment 11 wae reversed an and ason tho the case remanded lor for further proceedings in the supreme con court I 1 the case received great consideration and arid it was held that the subject t matter of the investigation was judicial and not legislative and that there was no power in ili congress Con grefe or in in either house on oil the allegation that an ansol insolvent vant debtor of the tiie united united states was interested in a private business partnership to investigate the laffaira of hat that partnership and coabe u they had no authority to compel a aw ithem to testify on the sub jert tha tito house of representatives said the t ourt has bas I 1 the he eole sole right to im impeach c I 1 1 0 alicem of the government airth and the e f senate to try fr them were the question of such fph ment before either body actins acting in its p appropriate P ato sphere on that t wo iw poo no reason to doubt ahe I 1 he right to compel corn pel the lie attendance of it and their answers to proper questions in jn the name same manner and by the ute althe earno means that courts of justice can in like cases but no person can be punished pun idled for contumacy as a witness before either house unless his tAi testimony mony is required in a matter into which that aired bouce 0 use has jurisdiction to inquire and nei neither tiler oft of thieo fun M bodies possesses tile general power pomer of making inquiry into the sivate private affairs of a citizen in I 1 i all the argument in the case u no has been ien mado made of what tho tile house louse of ives or congram could have done dope in the way of remedying wron wrong or cecur pe curing rig tile creditors cre ditore of if jay cook A co or evel bevc l the united states was it to be a fruitless anve investigation ti into the personal affairs of indi 1 I 7 it if FO the house of cepro pro centa Fenta tives luid had no power or authority in fit the matter more than any other e equal number of gentlemen in interested te rested f for r tile government govern vernm mint of the co country try we mes r eliat ila t it could result in it no 0 valid on the subject t to 0 which leg t he e inquiry referred when tile liec cape act went ment back to the lie supreme court of the lie district of columbia colum bia and tried the he plaintiff recovered a verdict of tion against the sergeant at arms this amount wae was subsequently y reduced to w m aich w was as pal paid d b by order of Con congre Cong grevis rw this case 1 will I I 1 L tand for nil all time ae sate bulwark against hist the invasion of the right ot a citren to protection in in hia his private affairs AV protection 1 no ti I 1 0 o unlimited scrutiny of investigation vl vesti sti by a congressional committee ml ace dittli with reference to tho vouchers respecting spec ting thich tho the principal principal interrogatories ga tories aro are pr propounded ed and to which w e are asked to comil compel ansu ore from tile witness witt less it ie is conceded by the that the money cov covered eroil hy by them were not charged the united states in fit aiex ascertaining ertain the et earnings of tho company it such were v ere the case it is difficult to see ahat int interest erett the united stale states can havo have in tile disposition of thone moncye moneys be that as it may the general I 1 courts cannot u upon pon that conon guell casion cc sion aid the in ascertaining how bow the moneys were expended these courts cannot become an instrument of tho the commission in ili furthering ita its investigation the act ot of a creating the railroad corn com ration in srm I 1 ss 9 I 1 1 I that it may invoke the aid a ak ny y circuit on kintly i court to the attends e attendance nee of 0 witness and tin we pro luction ot of boks papers ami and decu in n ante ta at relating fall to the subject ot of inquiry it 1 I 1 not appear to leave leve a any y rd discretion ls in the matter with the c court g it would seem win that congress intended that the court should wake inake the orders sought upon the tile mere request of I 1 alie 1 e commissioner commissioners without regard to the tile nature of the tile inquiry it is difficult to believe that it could have intended that the court should thus be the mere mem executor of the commissioners sio ners will the pron provision ilion of the act authorizing the coarts to aid in the investigation in tha manner entreated must therefore be lie adjudged void the federal cour courts tsi under the constitution |