The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-03-26
BURTON'S DEFENSE.
TOday's Argument BY Attorney
Lehman.

A special to the Kansas City Star
from St. Louis says: Today in the
Burton case Attorney Lehman, on
opening for the defense.
An ideal legislative body. said Mr..
Lehman, would re composed of mem
bers who are in no wise interested in
other callings in life. 1t was not ex-
pected that legislators should aban-
don all their business connections.
There was no more discredit attached
to Senator Burton, because his name
was on the Rialto company literature,
than there would be to a banker or the
president of a mercantile company
whose name might be there.
Senator Burton has much right
to engage himself as an attorney TO
defend Major Dennis as any other law
yer would have. He had a right to go
anywhere to look fer evidence. This
defense of Senator Burton was the pri-
may consideration at the time
There was another feature and that
was the financial department. Of the
company The company wanted the
benefit of the senator's association and
friendship.
Mr.. Harlan had testified that Sena-
tor Burton had said he would not con-
sent to be employed to appear before
the departments. In Analysing the tes-
timOny Mr.. Lehman asserted thas
Senator Burton did not attempt to in
huence him in any way
The testimony merely showed that on
his first visit Senator Burton inquired
only whether any charges had been
filed against the Rialto company.
In the. second visit he said the tes-
timony showed that Senator Burton
called only to inquire whether or not
certain man was postotf1ee IN
apector.
The third time Senator Burton called
he called to introduce Major Dennis,
and all he did was to say that Major
Dennis was fine man.
The fourth time was when Senator
Burton called to ask about the books
in the possession of Mr.. Dice. the st.
Louis Dostoffice inspector.
Mr. Lehman now came to the first
Maltby house visit of Mr. Cochrane.
Senator Burton called attention to his
financial condition and his losses,
through no fault of his own. Senator
Burton explained that he wanted to
practice his profession just as Senator
Edmunds and other distinguished sena-
tors had done, without impairing their
usefulness or services to their govern
ment. Senator Burton wished to sup
plement his salary. The demands on a
man in his official station are great.
1t would be tremendous sacrince
to him to abandon his practice. 1t was
a laudable ambition for a man to wish
to continue in the practice of the law.
1t was question with some men
whether they could go to Washington
without supplementing their official
salary with a sufficient legal practice
to maintain themselves.
IF there was any influence exerted
the government failed to place its
finger on the spot. There was no evi-
dence anywhere that Senator Burton
had attempted to influence anybody.
The government had proved nothing
more than that the senator had paid
several civil calls of courtesy.
IF this was an attempt of improper
influence let us beware of any man
unless he come to US with scowl on
his face. Let US make life a hell of
distrust.'
Mr.. Lehman was followed by Bert
D. Nortoni, assistant United States dis
trict attorney, who confined himself al
most exclusively to the reasons alleg-
ed by the government for which Sem
ator Burton was employed by the
Rialto company.
He quoted freely from the transcript of
the evidence by the witness for the gov
eminent and attempted to bring strongly
before the jury the contention of the pros
ecutiOn that Senator Burton was engaged
by the Rialto company solely for his in
nuence as a United States senator in any
matters that might come to the attention
of the pOstOffice department that affected