The Washington times., 1913-10-17
THE sULZER CONVICTION.

Governor Sulzer is convicted on three charges
Filing false statement of campaign contributions
Swearing to that statement.
Suppressing evidence against himself before the
assembly.
He is acquitted on the charge of bribery or in.
timidating witnesses to keep them from testifying
against him.
To the hour of writing no vote had been taken on
the charges of larceny of campaign funds, misde-
meanor in preventing witness from testifying Cor
rupty influencing officers IN performance of their
duties, and using his official power to influence Sc
curiy prices on the Stock Exchange.
Chief Judge Cullen voted mot guilty" on all the
charges. He has from the beginning demonstrated
disposition to take very seriously his responsible
ties presiding officer of the court. He explained
his vote on each article at some length
Of the counts on which the governor is convicted
two related to acts done before he governor. If
an official may be impeached and convicted of such
ofenses, then such court might reasonably 90 over
the entire record of accused officials life and
vict him of anything it could find Objectionable. The
presiding judge vigorously dissened from the propo-
ston that the governor could be impeached of such
old charges. He must be removed from Office be-
cause of things done in Office, not before. He has
not been on trial as a citizen, but as an official
If this view be accepted, then there remains only
Article of the impeachment: charging him with
suppressing evidence against himself. What the
facts about this charge?
He was charged with suppressing testimony Of
certain specific witnesses. These were named in the
article. On the trial it was made clear that he
not guilty as to the witnesses named. But other
testimony, notably that of Allan Ryan and Duncan
w. Peck, concerning whom nothing whatever was
alleged in the articles of impeachment alleged that
the governor has attempted to tamper with the
processes of the Ryan testified that the gov
ernor wanted him to bring influence to bear through
political and financial men to end the prosecution;
Peck that the governor asked him to commit per jury
With notice that these witnesses charges
would be brought against him. without being indicted
of these specific ofenses, the governor is convicted
of them. 1t was necessary to amend the charges
against him, after these two men had testified so
as to admit this testimony and make it the basis of
conviction. At the very least it must be regarded as
most extraordinary proceeding for a court of the
station and dignity of the impeachment tribunal.
There is in the circumstances surrounding the
conviction, much to recall the trial of President
Johnson. For the lack of vote he was acquitted
The one vote which saved him was cast by Senator
Ross of Kansas whose State was well-nigh unan-
imously for conviction. Ross was driven from public
life, from Kansas, and into obscure struggle for
existence as printer in the far Southwest He had
opposed the sentiment of his State As time passed,
bitterness against him reented and in later years he
was forgiven but his career absolutely wrecked
by that one vote in antagonism to the sentiment of
his people.
There are signs that members of this court of
who have convicted the governor in the
face of community sentiment, may suffer like fate
Already there is serious discussion of Judge Cullen
as possible governorship nominee, and it is widely
believed that his old district will return Suzer to his
seat in Congress.
If Tammany loses the New York city election
it will have to charge the result largely to
its course in taking revenge against Sulzer who
though weak and vacating in some directions was
yet strong enough and honest enough to fight Tam
many and graft to the btterest end that official
could reach.