Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-03-01
Arguments by Attorneys, in Relation to the
Bribery Charge, are Heard Today.
WILL BE FINISHED TONIGHT.
senator's Aqua Nebcker D. H. Pecry J Representative
caister, and Mr. D. w. Thomson Testify Before
the Committee at Todays Session.

forehand; would consider II accepting
a bride In any case.
Mn. McCuNE RECALLED.
Mr. Mccune was recalled and stated
that In his previous testimony he had
not intended by the statement that Mt.
Thurman was one Of his men. 10 mean
that Mr. Thurman was working for his
election. but was only his attorney. Mt.
Thurman had not taken any part ~
particular In the senatorial contest.
SENATOR WHITNEY RECALLED.
Senator whitney made the following
statement:
Yesterday afternoon had a CONVEX
Eation with senator Frank J. cannon
na 10 whether he had authorized his
whether he had himself made the ne.
Eotiaiions, My memory was ana u
that he himself had first made the ar
rangoment. which was completed By MS
brother,
The difference WIS only on this one
point. and each was willing that the
other should have II his way.
TESTIMONY CLOSES.
All the witnesses having been heard,
agreement each side IL to occupy not
more than three hours In argument.
JUDGE DEY's ARGUMENT.
Judge Dcy made the opcning hrgu-
mcnt for the prosecution. He said, IN
part: I take a deep interest In the out
come OF this case. because II concerns
the integrity OF the State and OF the
American Senate.
II l. well TO understand the prtncl-
plies OF law which underiic the case. For
more than two centuries the courts of
England and % this country have de-
nned bribery In elections IN a broader
sense than NJ acts which are punish
able as crimes. bribery In It's broad
sense II any and cvcry unlawful tnru-
encc which would promote tho Interests
OF any Individual Tor election.
You are not sitting here rs a criminal
court. no punishment follows your de-
clrlon. bribery IL any offer that In a
sense would destroy the free right %
any man 20 vote according to the die
tatea of his conscience.
The speaker here read extensively
from the decision OF the court In the
case above referred 10.
have selected the ease OF Newell W
purdce, Vol 20. Wisconsin supreme
court reports. which decided the law In
relation 60 bribery. Had Mr. Mcclure
been elected on that Saturday by the
exact number Of VOTES necessary, and
had II been shown that any one of those
votes had been secured by means that
arr not punishable aa bribery. but yet
amount TO the using OF undue influence
To secure that vote the election could
have been declared void upon certain
causes which. nevertheless. might not
hnv" amounted 10 n criminal act, The
ease referred 10 WAS the election ~
county Judge. with a salary OF 1900
Newell did not take money and bride
people. he issued circular In which
he said he was willing 60 return 1900 Of
that salary TO tho county. This was
held 10 DO bribery. though not criminal
bribery and not punishable az crime,
Had he taken money ana offered II 10
any one. he would have been guilty OF
bribery In the criminal sense Bribery
In gneral Is tho giving or taking Of a
reward FOR public office.
First. as 10 the charge made by Mr..
Law. Let us hrrt look at the situation
OF the parties, of. Mr.. Law ana Mr. Me-
cunc. Mr., Mccune states he started In
By the expenditure OF large sums ~
money, that he began 30 assume n bur
den 90 debt upon paper, by his own
admission, his expenses IN this cam
paign may amount to $4,000, A man
who thus oxpendA money, would he be
50 pure 20 SpotleHs ~ not 90 use mono
Ia buy one vote N no needd ~ II such
election methods had been employed In
the past we should never have had
our Brown, our Cannon. or our Raw
Inns In the senntci ana know too that
upon that administration we shall never
have Thurman.
We turn 10 Mr. Law; I ask what mo,
tive could he have, young man AZ he Il,
thus to destroy his reputation III,
reputation has not been attacked; the
very fact that this has not been done.
shows that II could not be done. on
Monday Mr, Monson learns that Law
might vote for Mccune, Next we ind
Mr. McCune ana Mr.. Law wininR nnd
dining together on Tuesday evening.
Then thpy 20 10 McCune'a headquarters
10
into the private room. on the following
Friday Sloan talking with Mr., Law
about obtaining Laws vote, Sloan
using the term ''impugn." and then
took II back, and the further fact that
hc made an appointment with sloan for
all would do under these circunlstanccsi
next morlnf, Mr.. Law did what We
he sought tho advice OF one of his COM
panions, a member OF the Legislature,
and u lawyer ~ ability. Mr. johnson.
And what advice ala Mr.. johnson give
him? lie referred him to guardians OF
the city, who saw that u was simply
one mans word against another. and
that II was necessary 10 have plan
20 detect the offense; Does not our gov.
eminent use such means TO detect
crimes. BY decoy letters and other ar
tinces,
McCune next talks With Law over
the telephone: tells him not TO talk
anything over the telephone that he did
not wish To be heard. He met Law ana
asked him 10 speak more plainly and
he states that Law says, I win vote Tor
him FOR 81. 600 What does McCune ans.
wer2 II won't do It'll have votes
enough TO elect me without yours" No
Indignation; Mr, Mccune was wllling
10 20 TO "a private room somewhere.
Later we nnd them together crossing
the street. and saying. Law n you vote
for me don't vote Tor me on the roll
call, vote for me later on, Does not
that show Mcclure assumed TO dictate
vote? DID he not also send Soren
Christensen 10 Lester Taylor TO say,
do not vote for me on roll call, but