St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1911-04-05


to value the manuscript at about
$3.50 per word.
Believing that you would be more
than deeply interested in the works
and actions of the members of the
last session of Illinois legislature,
owing to the fact that possibly your
experience with that general assem-
bly, will be one of the questions
freely discussed, and assuring
you that I have severed all
connections with the party leaders,
and am to be Independent in the flu
ture in all my political dealings,
1 am, respectfully, yours,
Chas. A White
To this letter he received the fol-
lowing reply:
Hon. Charles A. White,
O'Fallon, Ill.
My dear Sir: / am in receipt of
your letter of December 4 in which
you advise me that you have manu-
script ready to. place with publishers
treating of your experience as mem
Der of the Illinois legislature.
I would be glad indeed to know
of your success as an author.
With kindest personal regards, /
am,
Very truly yours,
William Lorimer.
In his testimony before the COM
mittee, White admitted that in send
ing the letter to Senator Lorimer he
hoped to receive a reply that would
be of advantage to him, adding, Il
had no evidence against Senator
ings with him." He subsequently
sold the article to the Chicago Tri-
bune for $4,000 and the publication
of a portion of the same, that relat-
ing to his own alleged infamy in ac-
cepting a bribe from Browne, be-
came the basis for the investigation
ordered by the senate of the United
States.
Upon the strength of Whites charg-
es, Browne was indicted for having
bribed him to vote for Senator Lori
mer and was duly tried upon that
charge, White teStifying at the trial,
but Browne was acquitted by jury
of his peers and it is significant fact
that he has again been elected to the
legislature of Illinois by his constit-
uents and is now a member of that
body. White was not only impeached
by that verdict but stands impeached
by numberless circumstances sur
rounding his actions. In addition to
the money which he says he received
from Browne, he says he received
Der of the Illinois legislature, and
this he admitted he supposed came
from a corruption fund in the Tegis-
lature, Known as the "jack pot"
fund extorted from parties interested
in pending Legislation in considera-
ton of aid in retarding or speeding
legislation, as the case might be.
Three other members of the Illi-
nois legislature were dragged into
49, L,
err, charged with having received
money in consideration for having
voted for Senator Lorimer, all of
whom say that they received money
either from Browne or Wilson, or
from both, substantially at the same
time and under the same conditions
as those narrated by White. The
only question to be determined was
whether the money which they and
White SO received was paid them be-
cause they voted for Lorimer or
whether it was from the so-called
lack pot and for other and entirely
different reasons. Upon this ques-
ton the seven United States senators
before named summoned and heard
every witness whose name was sug-
gested. They came face to face with
all the witnesses and had full oppor
tunity to judge of their character
and truthfulneSS.
Having fully weighed the evidence
and reached their conclusions, oena-
tor Frazier was found to stand alone
in, his opinion that the facts and cir
cumstances surrounding the trans
actions warranted him in believing
that they received the money as a
bride in consideration for their hav-
ing voted for Senator Lorimer, al
though as before stated, he had fail
ed to find that Lorimer was personal
ly guilty of bribery, or other cor
rupt practices, or that he was cog
infant of such actions on the part of
others. Senator Frazier's six asso-
ciates, however, were unable to agree
with him in his conclusions, but were
of the opinion that these men did
not receive such money in considera-
ton for having voted for Senator LOr-
inner. I gave careful study to all the
evidence in the case and am impress
ed with the conviction that however
corrupt these persons may have been,
the money that was paid them came
Lorimer election and was received
by them for reasons wholly uncon-
nected with their reasons for voting
for Senator Lorimer.
To analyze the testimony in the
case would be to occupy the entire
space of the Herald and News and I
have been obliged to content myself
with giving this brief outline of the
case and the grounds upon which [
reached my conclusions. I want to
add, however, that it is a significant
fact, and one that confirmed me in
my judgment, that when the roll was
called in the senate, Senator Cullon
who has served the state of Illinois
for 40 years with distinction and
courage and whose private life has
been unblemished, voted in favor of
the proposition that his colleague
was entitled to retain his seat. 1
was clear in my judgment that the
charges had not been sustained, and
to have voted to unseat Senator Lori
mer would have been against my
judgment and violation of my con-
science.
Thanking you for your courtesy
and your Kindness in this matter, /