Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1911-04-06
?
Randolph, VT, March 20, 1911.
Mr.. l.. r.. johnson. Randolph, VT,
NV Dear Mr. Lol1nson;--


| MIR. l.. r.. Johnson Randolph VI.
My Dear Mr.. Johnson
| am In receipt of your Letter OF the
| 10th instant and am touched by its cour
| tesy and It's csndor. It Is true a. you
| suggest, that have seen the comments
| IN the Vermont newspapers upon my ac-
| ton in voting against the unscating of
| Senator iOriiner. but I have contended
| myself In the possession Of a good con-
| rcience and I'm the expectation that some
! time others like yourself would come to
| look at the question in Issue as one OF
! fact rather than Of morals. But upon
! your suggestion that the grounds upon
| which a ma jority of the Senate favored
! the retention OF his seat bE Senator
! T-orlmer have not been well understood
| In Vermont, ! am glad to set Horth. with
! such brevty as can. the reasons which
| governed my action.
Mr. Lorirner, resident OF tho State of
| Illinois. represented his district In the
! United States House OF Representatives
continuously for twelve or thirteen years.
! having received from the people six con-
| .ccutive elections. He was substantially
the initiator of the project ror great
| Ipbic waterway between the Great Lakes
and the Gulf ~ Mexico and for wears 50
devoted hinlvself to the development of
that undertaking that he gained large
personal following among both parties in
| the State 81 Illinois
The Legislature OF Illlonjs Of 1863, hay
| lnE balloted IS times without being able
| to elect a senator to succeed Senator HOP
| Ein., whose term had expired looked
about for compromise candidate. on
the 'sth ballot, Mr.. Lormers name first
appeared and he received one vote as h.
did Also on zach hallo' down to the 9ith,
hut on the sth ballot he received JOS
votes. 81 ~ which were democratic and
81 republican. ana he was declared elect
Cd. He took his seat in the Senate Juno
is, 1850, and for a year held It unchal-
,enGed and without any charge of any
| irregulari;y in his election.
on April 80, 1910. the Chicago Tribune
published an article which 1t purchased
of one Charles A. White. democratic
member Of the Illionois Legislature who
voted for Mr.. Lorimer. charging that
Re, White, and others had been bribed
ny J. ONeill Browne, one OF the demo-
cratic leaders in the Illinois House Of
Representatives. TO vote for Mr.. Lorimer.
Following this publca ton, Mr.. Lorimer
made an extended speech in the Senate
IT, which he explicitly denied the charge
ard alleged long existing an:i1osity OF
TIE Chicago Tribune toward him and con-
oluded his speech by asking for an invos-
tigation by the Senate of the circum-
stances attending his election. This re
quest WAS granted and n resolution adopt
ed directing the committee on privileges
md elections to make such investigation
and to report to the Senate
4 subcommittee Of the committee on
privileges and elections consisting OF it,.
Chairman. Senator Burrows, Senators
Gamble. Hepburn, Eulkeey. republicans,
and Senator's Frazier. Paynter and John
ston, democrats, convened In Chicago,
Sept %, 1910. and al the request Of the
Chicago Tribune permitted that paper to
appear by counsel and present such evil
dence as 1t had to support the charges
It had published. Mr.. Lorimer was also
represented by counsel and thereafter the
Proceedings before the committee We're
managed by the respective counsel above
named and every witness suggested by
either was summoned and testified
Two main questions were involved in
the controversy The first went directly
to tho personal integrity of Senator Lori
nler and his connection with the alleged
acts Of corruption Almost at the open
Ing Of tho Investigation, Mr. Austrian,
counsel for the Chicago Tribune. in an
swer TO an inquiry as to whether he ex-
pected 20 connect Senator Lorllner with
the payment Of money to secure votes for
himself. or with any corrupt practices,
stated to the committee that he should
say not. and when the same question
again rose later in the proceedings, he
again stated that he did not contend that
Mr.. Lorimer had anything 10 d. wi:h
such transactions. The subcommittee al
50 reported that no evidence was sub
Tlttcd to it, or was obtainable so far as
known, inculpnting Senator Lorimer I'm
bribery or attempted bribery, II such
Il ere was, Of any member of the Legsla-
ture; and that there no evidence
that Senator Lorimcr had any knowledge
whatever OF bribery or attempted bribery
~ anyone And after a faithful ~xamin-
alton Of the evidence | am convinced of
the correctness of that finding.
The second question involved the integ-
ritv OF the election itself and received
most careful conside ration on the part Of
the committee. In its investigation OF
this question, Its members continued their
la oors In Chicago for period OF three
weeks, bearing the testimony Of about
forty witnesses whose evidence Cousti-
tGtes volume OF about 800 printed pages,
me hearings were open 10 the press and
public.
me charge was that White, the man
VINO sold his so-caled confession to the
NhlcaEo Tribune, and two or three OF his
associates in the Legislature had, some
tine III the summer following the ad
Journment OF the LEGISLATURE, received
money from j. ONeill Browne and one
Wilson In consideration or by reason of
having voted for Senator Ioriner White
alone claimed that he voted for I.orimer
by reason OF promise made hy Browne
prior 10 tho election that he should be
paid s. 40 therefor
The evidence is clear that White wes a
consplrator from the day following Lcri-
uer's election. His crying need was mon
ey and II made no difference to hin,
| Row he got t. He admitted to his init
mates that he had no knowledge OF any
! corruption In connection with the cleo.
,ion hut on three or four occasions, and
to a. many different persons. he disclosed
nj. nuroosc TO make Browne or Lorimer
| "com. over good and hard" when he said
thu word on ono of these occasions he
r.plied TO tho inquiry, Have you got