The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-01-10
FIGHT AGAINST
 L0R|MER BEGINS Senator Beveridge Submits Minority Report On Case SPEECH BY SENATOR OWEN Oklahoma Man Arraigns Election of Lorimer Very Severely and As-
 serts That Lorimer Is Not
 Legally Elected

idge today submitted to the Senate his minority report from the committee on privileges and elections. in which he de- clares the testimony was conclusively that liar enough than mere bribery was prae- ticed to invalidate the election of Senator Lorimer.
 The fight to prevent Senator Lorimer from retaining his seat was opened with a contest between Senators Beveridge and owen of Oklahoma, both of whom contested for the right to fire the first gun in the same cause.
 MT. Owen was first recognized. He presented a resolution similar to that which MT Beveridge had incorporated in his minority report. It was read and MT Owen was prepared to speak upon it when Beveridge demanded the regular order with the introduction of the morn ing business. The Vice President ruled that the Owen resolution was of the highest privilege and that Mir. Owen, hay ing been recognized, had the right 10 the floor. Promptly appealing from the chair MT. Beyerdge was supported by a majority of the Senate In his contention that the Owen resolution would have to lie over one day under the rules. This permitted MT Beveridge to submit his report and have 1t read in the open Sen ate.
 Position of Minority
 The position taken by the minority re- port is that there were seven tainted votes shown to have been cast for Sen- ator Lorimer and is in line with that of Senator Frazier, who dissented on the subcommittee report filed in the case.
 The Beverdge' report goes further, how ever. It says.
 But those seven votes, which under the statute and the precedents are enough to invalidate this election, were not all the tainted votes cast in this transacion. The testimony shows that at least three additional votes were cast-those of Clark, Sheppard and Luke"
 The report says that Sheppard and Clark did not confess and Luke could not vote because he decided before the in vestigation, but the evidence convicts them of having the plunder at the same time and place from the same hands and same consideration as their fellow mem bers, who repeatedly testified to having received it and afterwards shown to have been in possession of 1t.
 After all morning business had been concluded in the Senate, Senator Owen again gained the floor and made the speech which he attempted to deliver earlier in the day.
 Owens Arraignment
 A scathing arraignment of the manner in which MT. Lorimer was elected was made by MT. Owen, who asserted that the testimony taken by the sub-commt- tee which investigated the case showed that at least 10 votes of the 10S received by MT. Lorimer should not have been counted. Other senators who are known to oppose the retention by Mir. Lorimer of his seat have claimed that more than seven votes were tainted. The 10 votes condemned by Mir Owen and the reasons assigned by him for his belief that they should not have been counted were as follows:
 Senator D. W. Holstlaw, who confessed that he had received money from Senator John Frederick; John Frederick. because of his refusal to testify in the investiga- ton on the ground that his testimony might incriminate him; Representative H. J. c. Beckenmeyer, who confessed to an alleged corrupt agreement with Minority Leader Lee O'Neil Browne and to receiv- ing money from Representative Robert E. Wilson; Representative Michael S. Link and Charles A. White, because of confessions that they receieved money from Browne and Wilson; Messrs. Browne and Wilson because of the testimony of others that they had handled the alleged corruption funds; the late Representative Charles s. Luke, beceNee of his presence in St. Louis at the he the corruption fund was said to have been distributed and the fact that he was known to have received an unusual sum of money al about that time for which his wife was unable to account; Representative Joseph B. Clark, who was also at St. Louis about the same time and because of conveIsa- tions with others about the alleged cor ruption fund, and Representative Henry A. Sheppard, who is said to have agreed to vote for Mr. Lorimer because of the latter's promise to prevent the appoint ments of certain men as postmaster at Jerseyville, III.
 Testimony Analysed
 The testimony of these men or that of others in relation to their conduct was analysed by MT. Owen at great length and he said that in his opinion the rec ord of bribery and corruption set forth by him could not be broken down 'on the theory that the men who received the bribes were unworthy of belief on their confessions and their testimony against the bribe givers was unworthy of credit"
 He contended that the tissue of substan- tial and circumstantial evidence surround ing the case made it impossible to resist the belief that the confessions were sub stantially true.
 Under the circumstances attending the election of Lorimer by the legislature of Illinois, MT. Owen said he believed 1t to be his duty to the people of Oklahoma to the Senate of the United States and to