The Washington herald., 1911-01-19

schemes, showing that it was not the re-
suit of accident, not the result of parties
coming together through inadvertence or
incident. but the drawing together by rea-
son of some powerful organizing mind
concealing every step where it was poSSi-
BILE to conceal and cover it successfully,
until one unmitigated scoundrel following
the same impulse that moved him when
he voted for money, undertook again to
sell himself and reveal the fact which
drew in Holstlaw, Beckemeyer, Link,
Luke, and Wilson, and the entire scheme.
Senator Borah answered Senator Bur-
rows argument that the confessed bribe
takers were unworthy of belief with the
retort that the Senate could not hope for
proof by men of unimpeachable character
of corruption such as was charged in the
Lorimer case. He then took up the teSti-
mOny of White. HolStlaw, Link, and
Beckemeyer. White. he said, had testified
to receiving money to vote for Lorimer,
and there was the corroborative teSti-
mony that he had money, and that he
was with Lee O'Neil Browne at the times
he said the money had been paid to him;
Holstlaw had testified to receiving money,
and his testimony was supported by a
certificate of deposit for $500. dated at
the time he said he received the money.
BeckemeyerS testimony was similarly sub
stantiated. as was that of Link. The evil
dence showed that the bribe givers and
the bribe takers met at the times and
places named in the confessions.
Criticises InvestiEn EntfnE Committee.
The investigating committee came tn
for criticism from the Idaho Senator for
failing to force the witness Broderick
to testify in detail to matters concerning
which he had entered general denials.
The witness, he said, should have been
brought to Washington and placed in
the District Jail until he would testify.
Senator Borah also scored the committee
for reporting that the witness Link had
been forced to confess by third-degree
methods. and said that the evidence in
fact was directly to the contrary. What
in the name of justice is the power of the
State for if it is not to reveal the truth
where wrong has been done?" he de-
manded.
Senator Borah also argued that when
the deal was made with the minority
leader in the Illinois legislature to deliver
thirty Democratic votes to Lorimer, the
election of Lorimer was tainted.
II don't care if seven or ten or fifteen
votes were purchased" he said. IF
Browne himself was corrupted, then un-
DER the law any ICoSoiAoosS
tation of the situation the entire thirty
votes were corrupted. 1t is just as clear
as the MONDAY sun that without the in
f1uence and control of Mr.. Browne, Mr..
Lorimer could not have been elected
IF Mr.. Browne was corrupted, as the
testimony Of White. Link, Beckemeyer,
and Holstlaw, and the letters, kilograms.
&c., all tend to show. he was delivering
not only his vote, but the votes Of all
thirty members in tine combination. The
election could not have been pulled of
without first fixing Mr. Browne"
Early in his speech Senator Borah had
a lively tilt with his colleague. Senator
Hepburn, of Idaho.
Burrows Defends LoriRef.
Senator Burrows occupied the attention
CT the Senate with an extended argument
in defense Of the report Of the majority
of the committee. Senator Burrows is
the frst Senator to come to the defense
Of Senator Lorimer. but be stated at the
outset that the persistent criticism of the
majority report impelled him to speak in
its defense.
In conclusion, Senator Burrows said:
..Is am not unmindfuft Of the disfavor
to be gained by seeming to stand be-
tween transgression and retribution.
Neither Om ignorant OF the applause
to Be won now In. the role oe evonyer and