The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1911-04-18
Dillingham; and Lorlmsr

case Is the correct one, The Daily
News has been stultlfying itself in
ItB criticism OF Senator Lorimer and
the circumstances OF his election. Let
us then, without any merely personal
feeling and with the sincerest respect
for Senator Dilllngham's character
and aims, examine his argument.
First and most important OF all II
Is to be noted that Senator Dilling-
hams defense is entirely technical.
and is not based on the merits OF the
case.
The charges against Senator Lori
mer were originally made by The Chi
cago Tribune, which bought It's infor-
nation OF one Charles A. White, a
Democratic member of the Illinois
legislature. White wrote an article
covering his charges OF bribery
against members OF the legislature In
himself and the Tribune paid
him $4,000 for It.
The Congressional investigating
committee OF which Senator billing
ham was a member did not make a
general investigation of the bribery
charges, but confined Itself to investi-
eating. The Tribune charges only.
"The committee" said Senator Elihu
Root, deemed II to be their duty to
treat the charge from the beginning
to the end as they would have treated
a private complaint against private
holding the complainant TO
strict proof as a court would have
held a private lltigant, and the COM
mittee conceded that the charges had
not been sustained"
Senator Dillingham's defense is
based wholly on this action OF the
committee on the alleged fact that
The Tribune's allegations were not
sustained, not on the general evidence
given in the case.
When" asks Senator Root "have
we committed to that newspaper or to
any newspaper and its counsel, or to
any man, the guardianship of our hon
or and the preservation OF the integ-
rity of our government? No. when
II once appeared before the commit
tee that there was substantial ground
for the charges, when one witness had
appeared before them and given tes-
timony which If believed, established
the fact OF bribery, then from that
time Il became the duty of the com
mittee to do what the Senate resolu-
tion directed them to do-to inVesti-
gate the charges and to report to the
Senate, not whether The Chicago Tri-
bune had established case, but
whether in the election there were
used or employed corrupt methods or
practices"
AS may be seen, Senator Dillingham;
bases his defense on the alleged fail
ure of The Tribune to make out
case, and not upon any proof that bril-
berry or corruption were employed in
the senatorial election.
The difference is, we think sufiici-
emily obvious The senator's argu-
ment is in effect not that there was
no bribery, but that The Tribune's
charges of bribery were not sustain
ed-two very different things.
In his brief concluding paragraphs,
Mr. Dillingham; admits that three
members of the Illinois legislature re-
ceived money. but says that these
persons, however, corrupt they may
have been, the money that was paid
them came from sources unconnected
with the Lorimer election, and was
received by them for reasons wholly
unconnected with their reasons for
voting for Senator Lorimer.'"
AS matter Of fact the three legisla-
tors in question swore that Mr..
Browne, Democratic leader and bos-
ON friend Of Senator Lorimer, paid
them $1,000 each. and two OF them
testified to that payment being pur-
suant to promises made by Browne
prior to Lorimers election. A fourth
person bribed was Senator Holtslaw.
"The facts are plainly established"
says Senator Root, that four of the
votes cast for Lorimer were cast I'M
der the influence of money paid, and
the money was paid by three others
of those who cast the votes" And
these seven corrupt votes invalidated
Senator Lorimer's election.
"The testimony in this CASE con-
cluded Senator Root, Shows this seat
here to be filled as the result of cor.
ruption."
We lay stress upon Senator Root S
argument because he is the ablest
lawyer In the United States, the keen
est mind, the most masterfuI intellect.
When he says a thing is true, its
truth is established; when he makes
an argument, every link of it is of
adamantine, unbreakable strength.
His remarkable speech from which
we have quoted establishes the con
tention against Senator Lorimer be-
yond peradventure.
at rests with the Senate Of the
United States" said Senator Root, Ito
do its duty now, and, hard and un.
pleasant as it may be, purge itself OF
the results of this foul conspiracy
against the integrity and purity of our
government"
To this call Vermont responded
! through its junior senator only.
From Senator Dillinghams explana
ton we do not see that any legal ques.
tions-any technicalities-were in
volved, in the case or swayed his de
cisiou. The question was one of the
fact and of morals and nothing else
And it was on that basis that Senator
Page cast his vote against LorimeI
and thus represented, we believe, the
overwhelming preponderance of opin
ion in Vermont and among honest
men Observation-Disclosures News.