The Olneyville times. (Olneyville [Providence, R.I.]) 1887-1917, 1905-03-10

| protect the act OF voting. the place where
| II IL done. and the man who votes from
| personal violence or intimidation, and hs
election Itself from corruption" Ol0 u. g..
| GGD.
II Is. moreover, equally clear that Con-
gress has complete and paramount juris-
dictlon over the choice OF Presidential
electors. provided that Congressional rep
resentatives are also chosen at the same
election.
Referring To the power of Congress 20
regulate the election OF its members, the
Supreme Court said:
"If this be NO. and II is not doubted, arc
such powers annullcd because an election
for State officers H. held at the same time
and place? II II any less important that
the election OF members OF Congress
should be the free choice OF all the elect
ors because State officers are TO be elected
at the same timc?"-ii0 T.. s.. eGl.
~ has been held by the Supreme Court
nZ7 l.. s., 73D that IL IL not necessary 20
prove that an act. relating to the conduct
OF an election at which "A Congressman ~
chosen was committed with "the specific
intent or design to influence the COngrcs-
sion9l election" The Supreme Court fur
ther held that "the object 20 be attained
by these acts Of Congress Is 10 guard
against the d0nOer. and the opportunity"
OF committing Objectionable acts "as well
az against direct and intentional frauds
upon the vote for members of that body"
and that the power Of Congress can be in
vOked whenever such election IS "eJpOsed
or subjected 10 the opportunity . .
or Ia the danger" OF such acts "as may al
feet that election. Whefh.r they actually do
so or not"
n would not therefore be possible a.
cvadc the operation Of n Federal statute
prohibiting tho secret contribution or eH-
pendituTe OF money In connection with
any election Mt which a Congressman may
be chosen, on the pretsnce that there was
an absence Of intent 20 influence the Con
grcssional election. or that the contribu-
tions or expenditures were directed solely
20 secure the election 81 Presidential elect
ors or State officers.
II ~ sufficient that IN" prohibited act
should create danger or opportunity"
OF improperly influencing the election. A.
declared by tho Supreme Court In the case
lnst quoted:
"Therc are many instances when an act
may be criminal In it's character without
there being criminal Intent, ...
"The case before us IN emincntly one OF
this character Crimes against the ballot
have bccOm. 80 numerous and 30 serious
that the attention Of all legislative bodies
has been turned with anxious sOlicltudo
TO the means OF preventing them. and 90
the object OF securing purity I'm elections
and accuracy In tho returns by which
their result g. aFccrtaincd. The acts of
Congress and Of the state Of Indiana now
under consideration are OF this class,
aud 10 say that the &C.. want of an intcu-
ton on the part OF persons who are allcR
ed 10 have acted fcloniOusly In the viola
tion OF those laws excuses them because
they did not intend 10 violate their pro-
visions os 10 all ns plrsons rOfcd for ~
such an election. although they might have
intended To affect the result as regards
nf IL uflff fastl nufF To
common sense and Is not supported by
any sound authority"-l27 4. s., 755
An Indictment under the Federal stat.
utes for Illegal voting and for bribery has
been upheld. although II was not charged
that the ballot cast contained the name
OF "A person voted for for representative In
Congress. nor that the bribc Tds giren wih
the intent 10 influence Tho rOicr IN respect 10
hs Congregational election:
"whcn Congressional and local cleo
tions are held at the same time ana
places and mixed ballots are cast as Is
the practice In Indiana, II Is n misleading
refinement, | think. to say that there are
two ClectionE-R national and n State
held Mt the same time. II Is one election.
for the conduct Of which the two soycr-
eighties have common concern. though
Interested In several results Or pdrfe
Scbod 100 T. s., 31D: and Congress having
unuuestiouably the paramount, and, when
II sees III To assert II. the exclusive. power
TO regulate such elections. must. In the
first instance at least, determine for itself
what regulations are necessary or expc-
dent. and II Is not tho province of the
courts To restrict or annul any enactment
on the subject, on the ground that n is
not within tho powers Of Congress, unless
n be dcmOnstrablC that In no crcHf and
under no circumstances, the offence defined,
and coming within tho letter and spirit
~ 81 Inn
for representatives I'm Congress II Is
manifest that regulations and restrictions
which permitted inquiry whether the Of
fender Ia such respects Intended 10 In
tlmidatc OF influence the conduct OF vot-
respect To one office or RRotncr.
would be inefficient. because easily evad-
ed. Once concede that the indictment Tor
bribery OF n voter. I'm order To be good un-
der tho Federal statute. must charge an
attempt TO anect the Congressional cleo
tion. and the speedy result will he. not
less bribery IN respect to that election.
but more likely large Increase. con
trived and conducted IN such way Ia
prevent proof OF the real purpose. by pre-
tcnces of different purposes, "-(2a Fed.
Rep. S9S-sD
The purport of logisla tlOn requiring pub.
llclty I'm respect To- campaign expenditures
Is TO secure the freedom of elections from
improper Influences TO this end the In
nHcfN ltSttalnNh OF tne corrupt iFHftcsR
Acts are more encCtual than tho direct
prohibition. aud penalties Of statutes Fed
cral or State. penalzing bribery.
The adequacy Of existing laws To- punish
one proved guilty Of bribery may he ad-
mtted as general proposition That
specific legislation Of this nature has not
proved effective To protect the free eNer-
else Of the franchise from the undue iu.
duencc OF campaign expenditures must
also be- admitted. II 10 n crime which IS
not readily susceptible OF direct proof
The remedy sought in the statutes already
cited and I'm the suggested Federal lcgsa-
tiou is rather one Of prevention by indi-
rection. IL is the Limitation and reguls-
tion OF the possible sources and agencies
or corruption which is Of primary rrac-
tical importance The chief inducement
10 bribery must he removed by throwi ing
safeguards about the present irrssponsl-
bic use OF campaign funds. The chief
remedy proposed by such legislation IL
publicity. not purely police or penal regu-
lation of the grosser forms of bribery.
IL can not be successfully contended
that Congress has not constitutional pow
or TO insure by enforcing publicity. an
end which in the exercise Of its undoubt-
ed authority IL has sought To reach 10y
more direct but less effective legislation.
The Supreme Court has declared:
III this government is anything more
than mere aggregation of delegated
agents Of other states and governments.
each OF which is superior TO the general
government IL must have the power 90
protect the elections on which it's exist
ence depends from violence and corrup-
ton. &C..
"If this be 50. and u Is not doubted. are
such powers Rnnulled because an election
for state officers is held at the same time
and placer Is IL any less important tho,