and a fine of $100.

For three years Mr. Chapman has been fighting this decision, on the
ground that the question was not a proper one to ask, and that he had
been right in refusing to answer it.

The result of the various appeals in this case has been watched for with
the greatest interest.

The final decision has upheld the dignity of the Senate, and shown the
people that a Senate committee is not to be trifled with.

The Senate itself was a little ruffled over the matter.

When it was proposed that the President should be asked to pardon Mr.
Chapman, Senator Allen, of Nebraska, introduced a resolution that before
the President should be applied to for pardon, Mr. Chapman must appear
before the Senate, and purge himself of his contempt by answering the
questions that he had refused to answer three years ago.

Mr. Chapman would probably have still persisted in his refusal, and got
himself into fresh trouble; so it was perhaps a good thing for him that
he did not personally apply for a pardon.

Mr. Havemeyer's lawyers are busy over his case. They intend to say in
his defence that the questions asked him had nothing to do with the
matter in hand, and that he also was right in refusing to answer them.

In the mean time Mr. Havemeyer is using his personal influence to
persuade the Senators not to prosecute him and to let his case be