Los Angeles herald., 1905-02-10
THREE SENATORS
UNDER ARREST
Continued from Page one3


The expected happened when the
special committee which has been in
vestigating the accused men. sent in a
communication through its chairman,
Senator Charles NJ. Belshaw, asking for
further instructions. The committee
related what had been accomplished
up to the present time.
No sooner had the report been read
than Senator Lukens of Alameda Of
fered a resolution to the effect that the
investigating committee be authorized
not to administer the oath to the ac-
cused senator's. The object in intro
ducing the resolution was intended to
accept the advice of District Attorney
Seymour that the ends of justice would
be defeated, and that the wheels of
law would be stopped if the senator's
were permitted to testify under oath.
Shortridee Opens Debate
A long debate then occurred over
various motions and resolutions which
opened the discussion by urging the
senate to start right and in support
of his ideas made a motion that the
committee be instructed to swear the
accused sena tors as witnesses and ac-
cept their testimony. He also made
a motion to strike from the Lukens res
olution the word mot"
Senator Simpson of Alameda, a MEM
Der of the investigating committee,
submitted a set of resolutions, in
which he recommended that the COM
mittee be excused from continuing the
investigation, with the object of letting
the law take its course.
Senator Shortride was opposed to the
substitute as offered by Senator Simp-
son. He sought to have the question
of whether the accused senators
should be sworn placed directly before
the senate for a vote. Speaking as
chairman of the committee of inquiry
Senator Belshaw declared that if the
Simpson resolution was adopted it
would not be for the best interests of
all concerned.
AT 12:40 p. m. the senate took an
adjournment until o'clock,
Afternoon Session
When the senate convened at 2:15
o'clock this afternoon the same large
audience was present to listen to
continuance of the debate and await
the verdict of whether the senators
are to be sworn for the purpose of
taking their evidence
Senator Shortridge, who first took
the floor, argued that District Attorney
Seymour of Sacramento county had
misinterpreted the law, which says
that mo person sworn and examined
before either house of the legislature
or any committee thereof can be held
to answer criminally, or be subject to
any penalty or forfeiture for any fact
to testify
Shortridge cOntcnded that the ac-
cused men are not required to testify
and he believed they should be sworn.
lie declared that the action of the sen
ate would not bar prosecution by the
courts; that they could be punished
for bribery or for falsely testifying.
The senator said he was always for the
law, and he stood for the rights of the
accused senators. Laws had been made
giving rights and protection to men,
and they were entitled to offer their
defense under the law.
1T is not right" said Shortrdge. "to
gag these men, to bind them and to
cruelty them just because of public
opinion"
At the conclusion of Shortridge's
speech which was ended with a pas
appeal for justice on behalf of
the accused senators, Senator Anderson
took the floor
Joseph Jordan has testified that he
was approached by the building and
loan people with the brbe proposition,
said Anderson. "If this is true they
are more guilty than the bribe takers.
Senator Emmons Speaks
At this juncture Senator Emmons
created a sensation by taking the floor
in his own behalf. In an emotional
manner he said:
1T was not my intention to say
anything in regard to this matter until
II was over. But have been maligned
by the press from one end of the state
to the other with evidence offered sole
ly by the prosecution. The law of self
defense is as old as the primeval ages.
Even i'm the early SOS law was
framed that a defendant could take a
stand on his own behalf.
public opinion does not wait until
l can confess; whether Jordan told
the truth or whether he lied. And