The sun., 1873-03-11

was not, technically bribery, yet that lie i'm
material, for II Is undue influence even more
dangerous TO the freedom Of elections than the
purchase of individual votes and partakes Of
the anna General nature, for IL Is begottcn 10y n
corrupt money consideration. In Englailu
bribery was held to invaidate the election OF
member Of Parliament long before there was
any statute Furnishing bribery, upon the general
principle that II impaired the freedom Of cleo
tons, showing that its effect in nyaluating an
election does not depend upon the fact that u
has been made punishable by statute as penal
oasnce Mnd 80 y Which w ah he IL
to Withdraw from the canvass and cast his iniu-
ence for another. must be held to have the same
effect In invalidatng the g ection as though tho
transaction was made punishable as criminal
offence.
THE EFFECT or BRIBERY.
Bribery may be said to bear the same relation
10 an eloc ion that fraud does to a contract; but
If there be difference, il IL that is more fatal
and that smaller ingredient Will have the eject
to destroy the life Of the elections, because the
purity and freedom OF elections are vital to tho
existence of every elective form OF government.
The case Of Rex AIT. Pitt in the Court of King 9
Bench and the works OF Rogers and Shepperd
were quoted In support OF this view. inc gem
eral policy aud provisions OF the laws OF Eng
land In regard to corruption In elections are
embodied In the Constitution and laws OF all the
States, and bribery made TO tnvalldate every
that tho bribery OF single voter. will
vitiote an election, although the candidate
may have mI Jorlty OF unbrbed voters is
considered, and Indispensable 70 the protection
of the freedom OF elections. IL the candidate.
who has been fraudulently elected, u entitled
to retain his seat, unless IL can he shown that
his whole majority was oorruptly procured, tho
operation OF the principles have considered will
in most cases 6e defeated; for, although he
be shown to be guilty of corruption and un-
worthy Of a seat in any legislative body, yet he
has the chances largely In his favor that IL can
not be shown to have extended to his whole
majority. Corruption In AN election may be
compared to
DROP or FATAL POISON
Al. IaNoa f,,N.
every part and destroys every function. The man
who has purchased one vote has shown himself
influence has been limited only by means of his
necessities. The Senate can either excel Mr..
Caldwell, which VIII require a two-thirds vote,
or declare his election invalid. The power Of
expulsion under the Constitution Is absolute,
but To be exercised under certain moral
restraints In the sound discretion OF the Senate.
The reason for expelling Senator because his
presence degrades the Senate has equal force,
whether his crime was committed before or after
of tine State,whlcb may prefer to send criminal,
and lie must be received, But the Senate can
protect Itself against the admission ofa acriminal.
EXPULSION is POWER
Incidental &c every legislative body. The opin-
ion Of Chief Justice Shaw Of Massachusetts, was
quoted. The case Is much stronger where
the offence was itself the very means Of adnis-
commission OF an independent crime would 90
10 the character and fitness OF the Senator.
Here 1t also goes To his title, To the cfice, and
the Constitution expressly says that the Senate
shall Judge the election OF its members. 10 say
that the senate cannot expel for crime COM
mitted before election when the g ime was the
yery means of election, is to say that tho crime,
II successful, cannot be inquired into. II a
candidate imprison or kidnap an opponent, or
arrest him on false charges, temporarily dis
gTaclng him, Or by frauds or gross bribery or
buying on opponents, secure an election and
slip into the Senate before his offences were
discovered. shall the success and conceaiment
Of his crime he their Constitutional protection2
CALDwELL's Defence.
Mr.. Caldwell said he had prepared a statement
whCh-hs voice being affected lay a acOld-he de-
sired should he read at the Secretary's desk.
Tie SECRETARY then read the statement, which
was in the nature of legal argument. There
was no prctence that his credentials did not
speak the truth. II was an absolute fact that "A
majority ot the Kansas Legislature did vote for
him, while there was no proof that there WIS
any restraint in the premises The election Of a
Senator Is the act Of state in Its sovereign ca
pacity. with which the senate cannot interfere.
Numerous prccedents are quoted In support OF
this proposition. The Constitution makes the
Senate the sole judge II the qualifications and
returns Of Its own members, but IL must bc gov
erned by written law. Mr.. Caldwell insists that
the senate must be governed by the law as II ex-
listed az the time Of election.
Before the reading was completed, on motion
OF Mr. Cameron. the Senate went into executive
sesyion. and afterward nd iouruel.