The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-07-16
OTHERS SAY MORAL
 ISSUE HAS RIGHT
Some of Those Seen Think Lorimer Has Been Made Coat for All the Political Sins of
 Generation

terence or opinion.
 There are many who think that in asmuch as the evidence, from a legal standpoint, was lacking in sufficient to convict the gentleman from Illinois of fraudulent manipulation, or the knowledge of fraudulent manipula- tion. the verdict was unjust. This ele- ment holds that Lorimer, in the yer nacular, was made the goat" of the situation, and that many with power to vote hurled themselves precipitately on the band wagon of a popular course; in other words, that the Senate listened to the cry of excited people for the blood of man
 On the other hand, many who ex pressed themselves yesterday held the opinion that inasmuch as there was evidence which tended to prove that i'm moral practices were employed, though probably without the Knowledge of Lorimer, to gain the votes of demo- cratic members of the legislature of Illinois, the Senate, with the power to the members, was not unjust in dis- missing the defendant.
 In the discussion Lorimer, the man, was not considered. In the opinion of men of Birmingham the question was this: Should Lorimer have been con vcted on testimony which did not con- form to the pusely legal variety?'
 Views of Lawyer" Commissioners
 The two lawyers who are members of the city commission disagreed. Judge Lane, while stating that he had not faith fully followed the testimony, gave 1t as have sat on the case as a jury sitting under the evidence in a legal procedure.
 Had I been senator,' stated the judge, T would have weighed every bit of tes- timony with as much care as l would weigh the testimony in a case of bur gary in which I was seated as a juror. If the evidence tended to convict l would have voted against Lorimer. But if the evidence showed that he himself commit bribery made in his behalf, I would have voted to sustain him.
 James Weatherly said: 'I do not speak with the idea of passing criticism on the action of any senator who voted in the Lorimer case. l read the testimony, or rather that part of it which was printed in The Age-Herald. From the testimony judged that there was reason to believe that certain fraud was committed in an effort to gain the democratic votes of the Illinois house for Lorimer. Therefore, 1 do not believe that he held his seat with justice. I do not believe that the Sem ate in passing on the right of member ship of any of it's members should confinc itself to testimony purely legal. l hold that moral testimony would be admis- sible''
 J. O. Smiths View
 James Quinton Smith, former city attor- ney, spoke as follows: Tt is my opinion that a crime was committed when the Senate dismissed Lormer. 1 read tram scripts of the testimony taken from the original report, There was no evil dence adduced showing that Lorimer had bribed anyone or knew of anyone hay ing been bribed. And there was good reason for the belief that much of the testimony used against Lorimer was of the fake variety
 Had the same testimony, or testi- mony of identical character. been ad- duced against a defendant on trial before a jury on the charge of stealing a COW, the defendant would have been dismissed Lorimer. in my opinion, was entitled to as much consideration. Many of the senators, it is probable, feared that tn cir support of Lorimer would result in their defeat in following elections. To vote against Lorimer was popular. This much is certain. He was made the goat This is certain. There are many men in the Senate, 1t is probable, in whose cam pagns money was spent This is also certain. Were there precedent for fir- ing every officeholder. in whose cam pagns money was expended, it is possi be that in the past we would have fired a President or two"
 Judge Fort Differs
 Judge William E. Fort took the oppo- site view. There is hardly a doubt" stated -he. but that enough evidence was submitted to prove that illegal methods were employed to gain votes for Lorimer. This was sufficient, to my mind to bring about his dismissal even though he might not have been aware of the crime committed in his behalf
 There were no criminal charges brought against Lorimer, and for that reason, it is my opinion that the Senate acted properly in not confining itself to testimony purely legal. There should have been no technical splitting of hairs in the case in which the integrity of the Senate might have been involved,
 l.. J. Haley's Opinion
 L. J. Haley did not agree entirely with Judge Fort. He held that Lorimer should have been judged solely on the testimony submitted ''The evidence should have heen considered in a cold blooded fash ion.r he said. "If it proved that Lori mer's seat had been gained through fraudulent means, I,orimer should have been dismissed. Otherwise, he should have been vindicated.'
 Harry Jones Talks
 Harry Jones, though not a lawyer, expressed his opinion. There is no doubt but that Lorimer was convicted of crime in which many others have had experience. It is strange that some- one did not hesitate before throwing the first stone. hear that there is a senator from the west who spent more than s1o0. 900 in securing his seat, and that he has been 'whitewashed' All of them have spent money in gaining their elections unless they are mem- bers from the south who are without means to spend.
 There Is democrat In the Senate who was elected through a compromise in which republicans and prohibition democrats figured. Of course, no money hands. But the compromise was effected, it is possible. through a general agreement as to the dispensa- ton of salaried offices.
 "The American people want purity in elections. But they also dislike to see one man made the goat for a score or more Of others"