The Washington herald., 1911-01-02

The Lorimer case continues to be the
livest subject that is likely to engage the
attention Of the Senate soon after the
holidays. Senators are now waiting for
copies Of the printed testimony, which
will not be available before next Tuesday.
The delay in getting the printed testi-
mony, which comprises 74S pages, will
probably send the case over into the
week beginning January g. 1t is certain
that the Senator from Illinois will be con-
fronted with formidable opposition.
At one time it looked as if the only OBJ
jections that would be raised against the
report of the majority of the Committee
on Privileges and ELECTIONS would be
voiced by the Republican insurgent Sem
| ators. Now it is certain that a number
Of Republicans who have not been classed
as insurgents will be arrayed in opposi-
ton to any report which declares that
Senator Lorimer owns his title to seat
by valid right.
Several Of the more prominent Democrat
| ic Senators have betrayed symptoms Of
opposition to the committees findings.
Senator Shively, of Indiana, is suggested
as one who has been giving considerable
attention to the case, and he is not en-
| tirely satisfied with the conclusions of
the four Democratic Senators on the COM
! mittee.. who signed the report. The con-
Sideration of the case bids fair to take
up lot of time.
Speeches Against Report.
| There will be several speeches attacking
the committee report. and it is assumed
that the Senators in that committee who
Joined the majority report will take the
floor to defend it. The consideration of
the case can hardly be concluded in a
week, according to the present indica-
tons, and there are only eight weeks of
the session remaining. with most of the
important business. including the general
appropriation bill, yet to be imposed.
The opponents of Senator Lorimer will
take the ground that at least seven of
the votes that were cast for him were
tainted with corruption, and should be
thrown out. four being the votes of those
members who confessed that they ac-
cepted bribeS in consideration for their
vote, and the three other members whose
names came out in the testimony in con-
nection with offers to bribe. The COM
mittee found that the evidence submitted
was not sufficient to establish the fact
that the three legislators whose names
figure in the testimony as having offered
bribeS were Influenced to cast their votes
for Senator Lorimer by corrupt conSid
Grafton
The committee in its report laid stress
upon the fact that the evidence did not
anywhere establish that the three legis-
lators alleged to have offered bribes were
actuated in voting for Lorimer by any
motive that was corrupt, and the report
finds justification of the action Of the
three Democratic legislators who voted
fJ- Lorimer in the fact that they were
seeA,Ig to gain a partisan advantage by
contributing to diScord in the Republican
ranks. The committee does not reach
the conclusion that the four legislators
VINO confessed that they accepted bribes
for their votes were actually bribed and
that their votes were tainted.
The report dismisses their confessions
as worthless testimony. dscredited by
the witnesses themselves. But even ad-
mitting that tine four votes of the con-
fessed bribe takers were tainted and
should be thrown out. the committee
found that Mr.. Lorimer, who had los
votes out of 2O2 members voting. would
still have a majority. The members of
the committee hold that Senator Lorimer's
official majority was fourteen. which was
the number of votes be obtained more
than all his competitors combined, their
total vote being ninetyfour.
Say Majority Is Necessary.
The opponents of Lorimer will take the
position that under the statute it was
necessary for Mr.. Lorimer 10 obtain a
majority of all the votes in the assembly
that day. 10s. They rely on the wording
of the law, which says:
And the person having majority of
all the votes of said joint assembly, shall
he declared t6Sbe duly elected as Sem
ator. They hold that "a majority of all
tie votes of said joint assembly, would
be 102. and by throwing out the four
votes of the legislators who confessed
that they were bribed and the three
others whose names figure in the testi-
mony in connection with the alleged CIV
ing of bribes, Mr.. Lorimer's vote would
be reduced from los to 101, or one less
than is required -Inder the law.
1t is evident that the great issue in
the Senate in the Loriner case will be
as to the sufficiency Of the evidence to
establish the charge. not only Of accept
ing bribeS, but of giving bribes.