The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1886-07-16

,hs matter stands the reports hold that
- ;1vestigation should not be insti-
tuted oy the Senate
Senator'S Hoar and Frye, in separste
-soorts state that they cannot concur
In the views expressed bv the other
members of the committee. The de-
scr,he the eminent sources ( ON which
the charges we're brought to the atten-
ton Of the Senate, and saw they think
the case presented is one in which il is
the duty of the Senate to permit the
petitioners to present their evidence and
Ia authorize the issue of proper process
10 aid in procuring the attendance of
witnesses. The Senate is the only court
woich can have jurisdiction of the
question. The courts of Ohio may ex-
ercise jurisdiction of the offense OF
bribery, but could not decide whether
the result of the election was thereby
changed. For the Senate to refuse to
I stem to this complaint would be taken
as a declaration that il is indiffer-
ent TO the question whether hts
eats are to be in future
the subject of bargain and sale or may
be presented by few millionaires as a
compliment 10 fri nd.
The report sets forth a series Of ten
proposition" which Little and Butter
worth offer upon t1eir own response
bility to establish the satisfaction OF the
Senate, largely by witnesses who were
not within reach Of the Ohio com
mittee.
In brief, among these are the follow
ing: Three fourths OF the members oil
the Legislature were pledged TO Pendle-
.1n and Ward; that Just before the
Legislative caucus, large sums I money
were placed by Payne's son and other
friends, at the control of the active
managers of Payne's canvass. that a
gentleman whose name is offered 10 be
given, would declare that DAVID X.
Paige had said he handled SIS, coo, and
that Oliver b. Payne had said il cost
him 500, 600 To elect his father; that the
members of the Legislature who
changed from Pendleton to Payne.
dio so after secret confidential
interviews with ageuts who had the
disbursement of these moneys and that
hese members about that time offered
large sums OF money for which they do
not satisfactorily account. The report
discusses the aforementioned features
o. the case at great length, and the con-
clusion is reached that an investigation
is warranted, The question Is not, the
IcDOIt TIC IGoGAs
is only whether 1t shall be inquired into.
No unwilling witness had ever yet been
compelled to testify, and no process
had gone out which could cross the
state lines. 1t would hardly be doubted
that in cases of the purchase Of
seats in the Senate would rapidly
multiply under the decision proposed
by a majority of the committee. The
first great precedent to constitute the
rule under this branch of law is to be
this: LIT is held by the Senate of the
United States that the charge made by
the Legislature of the State and by the
committee of the political party to
which larger number Of its C tizens
belong, and by ten of its representa-
tiyes in Congress. that an election OF a
Senator was procured by bribery &C
companied by an offer to prove the
fact. does not deserve the attention OF
the Senate"
The report concludes with a resolu-
ton directing the investigation of the
charge and with a recommendation
that 1t be adopted.