The daily morning journal and courier., 1905-07-31

birth of a son and heir. To-day Chl- ted States Senator John Nipple was sentenced for what the law makes crime. by the Federal court in Port land. Oregon. That which he did was wrong, not in itself, but because when he did 1t he was a senator of the Cni- ted States. He urged large money claim pending before a department and he received money for doing so. Had he urged it without payment, he would have been within the law and within the custom which senators pur- sue. But by taking payment he Vio- lated a law which forbids member Of either house of congress to ask or to receive pay for the urging of claims, pending in any government depart ment. The thing the senator did was not unusual, and is not in itself re- garded as wrong. The taking of pay for it is statutOrily made crime. That is the crime which he committed, of which he was convicted and for which he has been sentenced. He committed another crime as a conse- quence of the one of which he has been convicted. He swore that he took no pay It was proved he'did in court. The second crime was perjury. With that he has not yet been charged and for that he will probably not be tried. His conviction of the statutory crime wil suffice for the intents of government, and as lesson for mem- bers of congress.
 nA1N TvhN have done what John Nipple Mitchell did. One of them was. convicted, but to him was awarded @ new trial be- cause of judicial errors entering into the first trial The other senator showed showed that he received mon- ey for urging a claim, after he was elected United States senator, but be- fore he was sworn in as such. His | contention is that he was not sena- tor then, but only a senatorelect, and that he would not and could not be- come a senator until he had been sworn in as a member of the chamber
 We believe that this plea was admit ted and that the case against this sen- ator-elect, because of the time when the offense was committed. has been dropped. ... Here are three United States sena- tors charged with the same offense One has been convicted and sentenced Another has been convicted, but has l obtained a new trial. The third es- canedtrial by showing that he had not qualified as a member of the senate by taking the oath of office, when he did what he was charged with doing These three senators came respec. lively from Oregon, Kansas and Ne 1 braska. Those states are overwhel- mingly republican and these senators
 were long republican leaders in theil state. What they did. or rather theiI acceptance of money for what they did, will undoubtedly carry moral dis credit to the party which they repre- sent and which chose them to be. Uni ted States senator's, We can hardly think that their party in their states will be defeated, because of the re- proach which they have brought upon 1t, for republicanism Is very strong now in those states and the democracy in none of those states is fayorably situated to take advantage of the dis credit brought upon it's opponent,
 The proportion of, three senators tt the ninety senators comprising the
 whole chamber of states can be reck' oned by any one. The proportion oi senators who urge, claims before de | partments, but who do not take pay for doing so, cannot be established l because, so far as Is known, records
 are not kept and neither calls nor con l versations are taken down. We dC ! not know that it is morally wrong, i | is not legally wrong, for senator ol a representative to- urge upon depart ments the payment of claims, provi ! ded he does not himself receive money 1 for that work. But it is certainly {
 work from which representatives ant
 senators should withhold themselve:
 and in which they place the depart ments themselves at a disadvantage. | Every department seeks considera | ton at the hands of congress. Every 1 representative and every senator ha!
 vote. It can be cast for or agains
 propositions affecting departments 1 before which he may urge claims | Those departments can not easily re l gard the request or the demand of :
 representative or senator in tht
 same light in which they would re
 gard that of merely a private citizen l With congress is the power of tn
 purs, for congress alone can pass ap
 propriation bills. With departments | comprising human beings, the powe
 of the purse is not without influence
 The vote of the citizen may have al
 effect on the power of the purse though his choice of a representative
 or of a legislator who can help choos
 a senator. But that is too remote, to-
 far away. It is practically intangible
 The senator or the representative ha
 the only vote which the head of tn
 department or any of his deputie
 need take any account.
 We are aware that this sort of bus
 mess is what congressman think the,
 are elected to pursue. We are awar
 that claimants regard request o
 demand by member of congress 0
 either house, in many cases, as indis
 pensable. It is not indispensable, bu
 it is unquestionably valuable. .
 claimant, with a representative 0
 senator behind him, has any othe
 claimant, with no senator or represer
 tatfve behind him, at 8 disadvantagt 1