New-York tribune., 1873-03-04

wes carefully on his guard against being entrapped Ia
the use OF money and while 1t appears that Mr. YORK
WAS attending the anti Pomeroy caucus, acting as 'S
secretary and known by Mr. Poneroy to be opposed 70
him.
In considering the statement OF Mr. Pomeroy that NC
gave Mr. York s7OOo 10 take to Mr. Page 10 eh'oe
him 10 purchase the United States bonds to aid In esa6
fishing a national bank the Committee say Mr. Pomeroy
Is entitled to the extent that other men are to the pre-
sumption of innoceuce-a presumption which, they say
is strengthened by the fact that his aecuses
have failed 10 sustain their other charges oi poe'
After further review OF the testimony the Committee
say there several questions that arise IN TINS trans
which are the following Why did not Mr. Pomeroy de-
liver the $1,000 to Mr. Page himself when he called on
Pomeroy give Mr. York the money he to take 10 Mr.
Page In q sealed package Mr. Pomeroy may have de-
sired In view OF the coming election TO conciate MT
York by showing him that he was assisting his rend
Page by showing him that he was aiding him In estaD
him but even the suggestion Of this improper motive IL
not satsfactory answer to these Questions There Are
Pomeroy and Mr. Page such as 10 whether was In tne
morning or In the afternoon OF Monday tna M m
than such as show the absence OF
The Committee some Of whom were absent on other
duty from time To time as the evidence was being
TAKEN did receive printed testimony until the morn
ing of Saturday the LIST inst aud given tile eyi
dence such examination as In the press OF busness
thorough as desirable. The Committee bearing in mind
the whole Transaction Is the result of plot defeat
Mr. PomerOy, and remembering that the burden OF
proof on the party making accusation have come
to the conclusion that Mr.. York has not sustained ms
charge by sufficient proof contradicted as t IS Dy the
evidence Of Mr.. Page and Mr. P0meroy himself. Inc
Committee report herewith the evidence taken ana Win
the briefs OF the respective counsel. Signed by
Senators FRELINGHUYsEs, BUCKINGHAM and ALCoRN.
MINORITY REPORTS.
The following the views OF Mr.. Thurman:
cannot agree with the report OF the majority OF the
Committee. / think that the testimony proves a cor
rupt offer by Mr.. Pomeroy to Senator Simpson Of the
Kansas Legislature 10 obtain the vote OF the latter
also believe that the testimony convicts Mr POmeroy Of
having attempted TO brbc Senator York of that Leglsla
for him. That PomerOy delivered money TO
York is not denied. The only material issue between
them II, for what purpose the money given. York
says a bribe for his Pomeroy says IL was
HANDED York TO carry to Page, whom Pomeroy
had promised to assist In starting national bank
In my judgment the statements OF Mr.. Pomeroy
this subject are contradictory are inconsistent WIN
Pages statements opposed to the usual cir
attending business transaction, and are 80
improbable, especially In view Of the circumstances at
tending the Senatorial election that reliance cannot be
placed upon them. PerceivnR no good result from an
elaborate statement the testimony aud reasons
these conclusions, refrain from making
such "A statement. We're there time for tho Senate
consider the subject should feel It my duty to give
large the for my convictions but this Is the
last day of the session and Of Mr.. P0meroys Senatorial
term and before the reports be printed much less
considered the session will be at end. l. Therefore,
than To report the conclusions To which my
mind has been reluctantly ana painfully brought
Senator Vickers Considering the nature an
character of the testimony for tine prosecution aud
defense with all the surrounding circumstances, have
that the charges against Mr.. Pomeroy have been
sustained"