The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-01-28
Iowa Senator Declares He Is Not Entitled to Seat
ARGUMENT IS VERY LIVELY
Senator Bailey of Texas and Senate, Borah of Idaho Take Part fin the Debate and Cummins Does
 Not Change Views

Washington, January 27.-Contending for a rule of procedure that would deny seat in the Senate to any man whose election has been accomplished by fraud, MT. Cummns of Iowa today concluded his speech in the Senate in opposition to the report of the committee on privileges and elections holding Senator Lorimer's 8 right to his seat to be unimpeached. He declared that at least seven members of the Illinois legislature had been involved in bribery proceedings in connection with the Lorimer election and holding that these should be substracted from Lori mer's vote and not from the total poll, contended that the untainted vote had not been sufficient to accomplish MT. Lorimer's success
 The, Senate was urged to protect it. self against such proceedings.
 The Iowa senator declared that 1t would to have fabricated such a story as that supplied to the Chicago Tribune by Rep resentative White of the Illinois leglsla- ture without having 1t refuted by the facts.
 This refutation, he said, had not been made. MT. Cummins declared there was not one undisputed item of testimony that was not in harmony with the original story.
 Results of Bribery
 'If the rule is adopted it means that if bribery is skilfully done 1t will always ac- complish i,s purpose" the senator said Tt meane that you can bribe sufficient number of members without any evil consequence. provided you bribe just enough to reduce the total to the point where the candidate has a majority" This, he said, vas an unthinkable po- sition.
 Mir Bailey said that the corrupt vote should be subtracted both from Lorimer's s vote and the total vote. Saying that there had been POP votes cast In the senatorial election he said the seven cor rupt votes should be deducted from the POP votes and also from the 1oS cast for Lorimer. which would give Lorimer 1O1 votes out of 195-a clear majority
 Suppose asked Mir Cummins, "of the POE votes 101 had been for Lorimer and a friend of Lorimer's had bought one other vote for him, giving him 102, would MT. Lorimer have been elected?''
 "No," responded MT. Bailey. 'He would not have been because in that case the corrupt vote decides the result.''
 "Then it makes a difference whether one vote was corrupted or severn" re- sponded the Iowan, but the Texan would not concede the point, holding that ac- cording to his calculation the seven SUD- posedy fraudulent votes had not de- cided the result in the Lorimer election.
 Reasoning of Bailey
 MT. Borah contended that under MT. Bailey's reasoning a candidate would get the benefit of half a vote every time he bought a vote even though the purchased vote was rejected.
 MT. Bailey would not have it so and contended that if 2. corrupt vote was to be rejected for one purpose 1t must be rejected for all and must be deducted from all columns He would have such a vote treated as If 1t never had been cast
 Incidentally the Texas senator said he never had spent a penny either on men or newspapers to promote any of his five elections to the House or his two elections to the Senate.
 MT. Owen here contributed the result of a mathematical calculation, saying it showed that according to MT Bailey's calculations it would have been necessary to buy 16 votes to invaltdate MT. Lori mer's election, while according to Mir. Cummins. seven would have sufficed
 Mir Cunmins contended that the posi- ton of the committee and MT. Lorimer's s supporters generally was a mere fig ment of the fancy"
 'I felt he said, conscious of a great responsibility In this matter. It is not agreeable or pleasant to reach the con- clusion at which I have arrived I be- lieve the testimony shows that seven or more members of the Illinois legislature were corrupted and through this corrup- ton were induced to vote for Lorimer.
 T believe these seven corrupt votes in- validate the title of MT. Lorimer to his seat. It seems to me that although one may differ regarding the facts in the case, we should not differ as to the law"