Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1911-02-14
Mr.. Bailey will continue his speech


Mr.. Biiey is a member of the COM
mittee on privileges and elections ami
conceded with the report. declarins,
that nothing invalidating MIR. Lori
mer's title to his seat had been de-
veloped by the committees invests.
cations.
The Texas senator's remarks were
devoted largely 10 the substf ntiotion
of his contention that sufficien,
number of votes must be shown l.,
have been bought to affect the result
unless II is proven that the ofrfcisi
whose election IL challenged person
ally participated IN the osfense.
Senators Root. Cummins aud Bo-
rah. all opponents of Mr.. Lorimer,
were each in turn requested to stand
up and express their oplaions as 10
the legal soundness of this propo +
ton.
Dealing first with the general Va.
pect of the case, Senator Bailey en-
tered upon the consideration of the
law involved. He laid down thes.
two propositions:
First, IL the officer whose election
is challenged personally participated
in. or encouraged. or sanctioned the
bribery, then his election Is void with
out reference TO the extent of the
bribery.
Second If the officer whose eec-
ton Is challenged, did not personally
participate in. or encourage. or sane
ton the bribery, then his election can
not be void unless it Is shown by SUI
ficient evidence that enough votes
were bribed to affect the result.
The first of these propositions was
dismissed with the declaration that
there was not word In the testi-
mony to show that Mr.. Lorimer had
had any knowledge Of any bribe on
his behalf. He asserted that the Chi
cago Tribune had been compelled
through Its attorney to exonerate the
accused senator in this respect not
withstanding an unusual effort to
connect him with 1t.
True. the senator said, in the heat
of debate some senator's had sough,
to connect Mr.. Lorimer with the al
legged wrongful transactions but he
was sure they would repent of that
course.
Mr.. Bailey contended that even II
the seven votes OF White. Brown,
Beckemeycr Link, Holstlaw and
Broaderick, were not counted Mr.
Lorimer still had been legally and
properly chosen.
"Deducting these seven votes from
Lorimers 100 would leave him 1oi
and deducting these seven votes from
the total vote Of zoe, would leave
1870, of which 101 votes received by
Lorimer would constitute clear ma
jority, and he was therefore duly and
legally elected, insisted Senator
Bailey
h He ridicnled the contention Of his
opponents that these votes could be
subtracted from Lorimef,s column
and stiIi be retained In the total vote
declaring the contrary view was SC
elementary as to render It almost alb
surd to political authorities in support
of il.
we have the authoriy OF the text
books and the courts for saying that
an Illegal vote must be rejected for
all purposes and that 1t cannot be
considered for. any purposeyH the sem
ator Continued.
THAT Is not only the law and the
logic, but the rule best calculated to
promote, public morality. 1t treats a
dishonest vote as II the corrupt leg
islator who cast 1t were civilly dead,
at least In that transaction. and
leaves the result to be determined by
the votes of honest men,
Mr.. Bailey would not admit. as
Senators Root. Borah and others had
charged. that in demanding that the
total exclusion of dishonest votes, he
really was giving effect to such votes
On the contrary he undertook to turn
the charge upon his antagonists. say
ing that allegations Of taint had been
made. against eleven members of the
Illinois legislature. He added:
Subtracting these eleven votes from
a total of 202 we have an unchalleng-
ed membership of 19i members who
by virtue of their position and of
their integrity were qualified to elect
a senator. or this 19l members, s6
would be majority anw after deduct
ing every vote against which the sug-
gestion of dishonesty has been made
Lorimer would still have 81 as against
"a votes for his apponents.
Under those circumstances, no
one could deny that he was entitled to
his seat In this senate as matter of
law. and still less can they deny IT as
a matter Of morals. because he had a
clear majority of the honest men in
the legislature. Now let us apply the
rule proposed by the senator's from
Idaho. Iowa and New York and what
result do we reach?
by keeping these eleven men In
this equation they prevented 81 hon
est men from affecting an election over
"a honest men. and this makes II plain
that they are the gentlemen who are
giving effect to the votes OF rascals.
because by preserving these eleven
votes they thus prevent an honest ma
Iority from working out its WILL"