The weekly Elko independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 1872-1887, 1878-11-03
Jones On the Use or M.ney.

The Gold Hill Ners has done the
Democrats favor in publishing the
full text OF Mr.. Jones speech to the
Joint convention Of the Legislature by
which he was elected to the United
States Senate, In which he gives his
idea about what constitutes bribery.
or rather as to what does not constitute
that crime.
Here Is what Mr.. Jones says, as taken
from the paper above mentioned, which
no doubt gets it from Mr. Jones HIM
self: Corruption is no neoessary COR
ollnry to the use Of money. >, A sum an
vast as our national debt might be dis.
bursed. and no one be corrupted. The
mere disbursement OF money is blame
less in itself. The purpose, intent. and
effect must constitute the offense. IL
any there he. And deny. 30 far as
these churges have been connected with
my maine, that have ever sought to
corrupt a single voter, or that 1 have
ever exacted, or sought to exact, or
even asked. a pledge Of political support
from any member Of this Legislature,
or that have ever exacted q pledge OF
political support from any man, living
OF dead, in return for any consideration
whatever, other than my promises,
made in public aud private, that l
would. il elected, faithfully represent
the people, and that each and every
vote cast by me in the Senate OF
the United States would be for the gen.
eral GoOd-untninted by venality and
unstined by selfish or personal consid-
eTntions.'
1t will be noticed that Mr. Jones does
not deny, but by implication admits
that he "disbursed" very large amount
of money in the campaign preceding
his election. but he says corruption is
no necessary corollary to to the Use of
moncy-thHt the purpose. intent and
effect must constitute the ofrcnse il any
NASiu cN- -NoN iti AH iDi "
consider hotr il WAS that Mr Jones "dis
bursed" his money. Ii is IA we'll known
fac; that in the campaign i'll which the
legislators were elected who elected Hr.
Jones TO the United States Senate, the
Republican candidates for the Legisla-
ture all over tbs State were furnished
by Jones egcnts with sums of money
ranging from FIVE hundred TO two
ihorsnnd dollars, for the osirnsible pur-
pose Of paying their electionG cring .cx-
penses, also that lurge sums were G!so
paid by the same agents to the central
committees OF tho different counties to
be used for promoting the eluction
OF tho legislative ticket.
Now, Mr Jones says "the purpose,
intent, Aui effect must con stitu,e the
oaemse," very we'll. who is there that
will deny that Mr.. Jones purpose and
inteu. in "Iisbursing" this money was
to secure his election to the United
States Senate, or that the effect was ia
so elect him But Mr.. Jones denies
ever having cxucted or assed for a
pledge for his support for the position
to which he WIS elected. II is
asked in all candor what is the differ.
enco between doing that aud what Mr..
Jones does not deny doing-which was
to distribute Lis money to his agents
with instructions to pay it 10 the candi.
date for the Legislature, giving them to
understand thut IL was Jones' money,
and in case Of their election, they were
Of course expected to vote for him iul
the United States Senate.
This is what Mr. Jones did and " hal
Mr.. Sharon did also, and according tc
the standard proposed by Mr.. Jone,
himself. OF judging an act by it's intent
purpose, and effect. was no: his election
to the Senate just IN much tho intent,
purpose. and effect Of Mr.. Jones act ~
il he had bribed the members Of tho
Legislature to vote for him in any o,Lei
| way.