Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1910-08-02
SENATE WILL BREAK ALL PRE-
CEDENT If ILLINOIS SENATOR
Is EXPELLED.
MANY UNDER AcfusATIoN
NOT ONE EVER oUsTED
Senate Will Have to Be Shown That
Lorimer Had Hand in Buying Votes
to Insure His Election-lngalls, Mark
Hanna and Others Faced Invsstisa-
ton.
Especial Correspondence.

Washington, Aug. 2.-Friends OF
Senator William Lorimer, Of Illinois,
whose election is about to be investi-
gated as to alleged bribery of mem
bers Of the legislature, are able to take
comfort to themselves in the fact that
the senate has never actually kicked
out one OF its members on bribery
charge.
The nearest the senate ever came to
throwing out one of its members for
the offense of bribery in a senatorial
election was in the case of Senator
William A Clark of Montana. Sen
ator Clark would have been ousted but
he resigned before the senate had the
chance to Gust him.
An examination of the records shows
that the senate is quite apt to give the
assailed senator the benefit of any
doubts that may arise. The senate has
examined into six cases in which brlb-
cry was alleged.
ingalls, Once Investigated.
Back in 1873 John ]. ingalls,. of Kan
sas, had to undergo senatorial in
vestigation. 1t was alleged that legis-
lative votes had teeu bought in his be-
half In the investigation 1t was dis
closed that votes had been bought In
gals was assumed to know about the
buying. But it was not shown that
enough votes had been bought to throw
the election. So ingalls, was cleared.
Charges were made against Elbridge
c. Latham and Warner Miller, who
succeeded Conkling and Plat when
they resigned in the early sos. The
senate refused to take them seriously.
Ohio has had two cases. Henry b.
Payne, OF Cleveland, was involved In
1885. Payne was democrat. The
Ohio legislature voted in favor Of GUST
ing him from the senate but the senate
Of the United States did not see it that
way 1t was not shown that Payne
was personally cognizant Of the al
legged bribery. 1t appeared that another
party had done the buying of votes.
Senator's Hoar and Frye, from the
committee on privileges and elections,
presented a minority report which was
a strong and singing one They held
Payne should be expelled.
Then, there was the case of Marcus
A. Hanna. in which two members of
the legi slature were alleged to have
nothing, tho. 1t did not appear Sena-
tor Hanna had offered any brides him.
self James r. Garfield was a mem
Der Of the Ohio legislature. in the state
senate, at the time the Hanna charge
was stirred up and was investigated
by the legislature. He took the posi-
ton that the whole business was In
the nature of conspiracy against
the republican party and that the
charges should not be sustained.
Hope is in Precedent.
In the case Of Senator Lorimer, it
would seem likely, in view Of the
course Of the senate in the past, that
he will not be expelled. OF course, II
and he was himself guilty Of it, the
senate would drive him out. But if it
should be shown that some one else
had given brides in the interest of
Senator Larimer but should not be
shown he had had a hand in it, the
precedents indicate he will be allowed
to serve on unmolested. The dis
closures in Illinois thus far which tend
to show there was bribery have not
made any showing that Senator Lor-
inner had a hand in the offense. I'm
less the senate committee sheds a good
deal more light on this point than has
been and Senator Lorimer is drawn
into the mesh directly the senate is
likely to take the position the offense
is not proven and drop the matter.
That is what Senator Lorimer's friends
are hoping for.