The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1910-07-31
.LORINER'S ELECTION
DEEMED UNLIKELY
Senate Never Has Expelled
Member in Previous Brib-
cry Investigations.

Friends Of Senator William LOrimer
Of Illinois, whose election is about to be
investigated as 10 alleged bribery Of
members Of the Legislature. are able TO
take comfort 10 themselves in the fact
that the Senate has never actually
kicked out one Of its members On j
bribery charge.
The nearest the Senate ever came to
throwing out one Of It's members for
the CTense Of bribery in q Senatorial
election was in the case Of Senator
William A Clark, OF Montana Sena-
tor Clark would have been Ousted, but
he resigned before the Senate had the
Chance TO expeI him.
An examination Of the records shows
that the Senate Is quite able 70 give
the assailed Senator the beneT1t OF any
doubts that may arise The Senate mas
examined into SIX cases IN Whlcn ofl-
berry was alleged
Back in ISIS, John J. ingalls,, Of Kan
gas, had to undergo q Senatorial lnEeS-
IiEatfOn- II was alleged that legislative
vgtes had been bought in MS behalf In
The fnvestiga tion, il was disclosed that
votes had been bought ingalls, was
But il was not shown that enough votes
had been bought 20 throw the election
SO ingalls, was cleared
Charges Ignored
Charles were made against Elbridge
G. Latham and Warner Miller, who
succeeded Conkling and Plat when
they resigned in the early SIS The
Senate refused TO take them seriously
Ohio has had two cases Henry b
Payne. OF Cleveland, a Democrat, was
involved IN 1885 The Ohio Legislature
voted in favor Of oustiRg him from TIE
Senate but the Senate of the United
States did not see II that way II vas
not shown that Payne was personally
cOgnisnt of the alleged bribery II aD-
peared that another party had done the
Senator's Hoar and Frye. from the
Committee on Privileges and EleC-
tons, presented 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 LEGISLATURE were alleged to have
came 10 nothing, though It did not
appear Senator Hanna had offered any
brides himself
James R Garfield Involved.
James r. Garfield was a member 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
In the case Of Senator LOrlmer, II
would seem likely, in view OF the
course Of the Senate IN the past. that
he will not be expelled OF course
If It should be shown there was
bribery and he was himself guilty of
II, the Senate would drive MIN out
But If II should be shown that some
one else had given brides in the In
terest Of Senator LoTimeT. but should
not be shown he had had a hand in 1t,
the -precedents indicate he will be
allowed TO serve on unmOlested-
The disclosures in Illinois thus Tar
which tend 10 show there was bribery
have not made any showing that
Senator Lorfmer had a hand in the
odense- Unless the Senate committee
sheds q good deal more light on this
point and Senator LOrimer Is drawn
into the mesh directly the Senate is
likely 10 take the position that the
Offense Is not proven and drop the
matter. That is what Senator Lori
mer's friends are hoping for