The Oskaloosa herald. (Oskaloosa, Mahaska County, Iowa) 1885-1919, 1911-02-16
SAYS LAW SAVES
]. L0R|MERs SEAT
Bailey Rests on Contention Of
Clear Majority. ~
HURLS Def At OPPOSITION
Root, cummins and sorah Are chaI.
Isnsed to Dispute Soundnsss Of
Legal Proposition offered
BY Texan.
HURLs Def At OPPOSITION

Washington. Feb. 14,--By resorting
to the bold device Of asking his antag-
onists In the senate to stand up and
testify, Senator Bailey Of Texas devel.
oped a dramatic situation In his discus
sion OF the case Of Senator Lorimer OF
Illinois,
Mr.. Bailey Is member OF the com.
mittee on privileges and elections, and
he supported the report declaring that
nothing invalidating Mr. Lorimer's
title to his seat had been developed by
the committees Investigation.
The Texas senator's remarks were
devoted largely toward the substantial.
ton OF his contention that sufficient
number OF votes must be shown to
have been bought to effect the result
unless II is proven that the Official
whose election is challenged personal.
ly participated in the offense. Senators
Root, Cummins and Borah, all op-
ponents OF Mr.. Lorimer, were each in
turn requested to stand up and express
their opinions as to the legal sound.
mes OF this proposition. n"E.s1
Discusses Legal Points. '....'.
Dealing first with the general as.
poets OF the case, Senator Bailey en-
tered upon the consideration of the
law involved. He laid down these two
propositions: m 8". @.. q"
First, II the officer whose election
Is challenged personally participated
In, or encouraged, or sanctioned the
bribery. then his election Is void with.
bribery. $50 H@
Second. II the officer whose election
is challenged did not personally par.
ticipate In. or encourage, or sanction
the bribery, then his election cannot
be yoided unless 1t is shown by stuff.
ctent evidence that enough votes were
bribed to change the result" "'
The first of these propositions was
dismissed with the declaration that
there was not word In the testimony
10 show that Mr.. Lorimer had any
knowledge OF any bribery In his behalf.
He asserted that the Chicago Tribune
had been compelled through its attor.
ney to exonerate the accused senator
In, this respect, notwithstanding an I'M
usual effort to connect him with t..
True. the senator said. in the heat Of
debate some senator's, had sought to
connect Mr.. Lorimer with the alleged
wrongful transactions, but he was sure
that they would repent of that. course.
Says lorimer Elected Anyhow.
Mr. Bailey commended that even II
the seven votes of White, Browne.
Beckemeyer, Link, Wilson, Holstlaw
and Frederick were not counted, Mr..
Lorimer still had been legally and
properly chosen
"Deducting, these seven votes from
Lorimer's lOS, would leave him lOl
and deducting these seven votes from
the total vote Of 202 would leave 1876,
OF which the l01 votes received by
Lormer would constitute clear ma.
1ortty, and he was therefore duly and
legally elected" Insisted Senator
Bailey.
He ridlculed the contention OF his
opponents that these votes could be
subtracted from Lorimer's column and
still retained In the total vote. declar.
Ing that the contrary view was SO ele.
mentary as to render It almost absurd
to present authorities In support OF It.
Turns Charges on Antagonists.
Mr. Bailey would not admit, as Sen.
ators Root. Borah and others had
charged, that in demanding 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.