The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1899-03-02
DECIDED FOR HANNA.
Report Made by Majority. Of
Senate Committee.
MINORITY REPORT PRESENTED.
'dsJority Report Stated That No Direct
Rcmonstrnnce Had Been Fiied--No Per.
son Appeared-Only Report OF state
senate's Action Was Received.

Il
ate the report Of that committee on the
charges of bribery in the election to the
senate Of Hon. NJ. A. Hanna, as made
by the Ohio senate. The report sets out
that no direct remonstrance setting out |
that Mr.. Hanna was not elected or ought |
to be expelled from the senate has been |
received by the senate. He also shows |
that no one has appeared before the COM |
mittee and that no papers have been re-
ceived beyond the formal report Of the |
action of the state senate. Notwith- |
standing these failures, the committee |
has investigated the charges.
1t finds that "there is no proof sub. |
mitted either that, first, Mr.. Hanna was
elected senator through bribery, or sec
ond, that he had any agents engaged in
carrying on his canvass for the senate
who were directly or impliedly auth
orized by him to resort to corrupt meth
ods or to any form of wrongdOing, or
third, that he had any personal lnowl.
edge of the facts of Otis case. 1t may
be said that there is no evidence which
fairly tends to prove either of the fore
going three propositions"
In view of these facts the committee
on privileges and elections have reached
the conclusion that "the United States
senate is not called upon to take any
action in the premises"
"The utmost fact which the COM
mittee of the senate claim to have
proved" the report continues, sis that
an attempt was made to bribe Mr..
| Otis, which failed. Without further
| facts than this, the validity of Mr..
Hanna's election will stand unim-
peached, and the senate is not called
upon to search for further facts in the
absence of any specification of such facts
or of any distinct suggestion where they
may be found, the whole demand of the
state senate report that Mr.. Hanna be
expelled from the United States senate
being rested upon the Otis case Whether
even il this unsuccessful attempt at
bribery in the case of Representative
| Otis were fastened upon the representa-
tives of Senator Henna by undoubted
proof, the senate would be called upon
to take any action is not by any means
clear.
Certainly without strong evidence
that Senator Hanna himself had knowl.
edge CT the transactions the senate
would hardly be justified in doing more
than expose the facts for condemnation
by public opinion; and the exposure of
such facts as the state senate say were
proven has already been accomplished
by the state senate report; while there is
no direct evidence and substantially no
presumptivc evidence that Senator
Hanna had any knowledge Of what was
going on.
The remainder Of the report is devoted
to giving the committee reasons for not
taking testimony in the case, which are
summed up in this sentence from it:
"To go over the whole ground covered
by the state senate merely for the pur-
, pose of additional exposure would be
tedious, expensive and unnecessary.
The point is also made that there is no
suggestion of bribery beyond the Otis
case and it is shown that Otis never did
vote for Hanna. Reference is again
made to the states failure to prosecute
and i'll this latter connection the report
said:
1.-THE committee do not doubt that if
facts appeared from the report of the
committee of the State senate requiring
the United States senate out of a proper
regard for its own reputation to take
further testimony concerning Mr.. Han
mas election it would be the duty of the
| senate to proceed without waiting fOr
further prosecution of the case coming
from residents of the state of Ohio. But
! taking the case as it stands, and noting
the absence Of such prosecution, the con-
clusion of the committee is not to ask
the senate for authority and direction to
take further testimony, but to ask to be
discharged from lhe further considera-
ton of the report of the state senate of
Ohio"
A minority report signed by Senators
Turley, Pettus and Caffery was pre-
scented by Senator Turley. This report
takes the position that further investi-
CATION should be made and enters quite
fully into the statement of the case pre-
sented by the Ohio senate. The mi
nority contend that the attempt on the
part Of Boyce to buy OTIS vote for Mr..
Hanna is clearly proven by Campbell.
Seventeen hundred and fifty dollars, -
the report continues, twas paid in cash
by Boyce to Campbell as attorney
for Otis Boyce agreed to pay 81, 800
more when Otis reached Columbus and
a balance of $4,000 if Hanna was
elected"
They claim that it is shown that
HMra's managers, Dick and Rathbonc,
We're at the Neil House in Columbus,
whore Hanna hud his headquarters, and
, they repeat the details of Boyce's con-
yersatlons with them over the telephone
from the Gibson House in Cincinnati, as
overheard by clerks OF the Gibson at
was IN their interviews" the minority
says, "that the terms Of the purchase of
Gus vote We're iHally agreed upon be-
tween Boyce and Campbell" j"
Ahc minority report dealt ut length
WIN the conversations oyer the tele-
phone, giving full extracts from the tes.
tlnuny before the committee OF the
Ohio senate as to what was said in thos,
conversations, They also said that thert
was 0thor evidence TO show the intimate
relations between Boyce and EIanna's
managers, but they concluded that to
| quote II would carry the report TO un.
necessary length" The minority then
| said;
I'VE think Jha evidence TO which We
have already lcIonod, standing as il
does mlcolCradiutgd ana unexplained
shows that certain oi Mr.. Hanna's man
ayers at Columbus not only knew thl
purposes which Boycc had in view il
| Cincinnati, but also that they aided
aeettad ana advised him in car wing on,
these pupos 3. and athat this. state ui
tuii,uo EXISTED whlls Mr.. Hanna wa
| present a. his haadIGWters.