The Calumet news. [volume] (Calumet, Mich.) 1907-1938, 1913-08-07
NEW ISSUE IN
M'DONALD CASE
O,,ot will Be Made He Violated
Campaign Publicity Law

49,, case of Macdonald against Young
., no the allegation that William j.
u,cDonald failed to comply with the
,., reouiring publicity of campaign
yoeuses, says Washington dispatch.
minority Leader Mann has advised
congressman French, Republican
.,ombor Of tho elections committee,
Aha, the Democrats will be forced into
HAIRCUT expression about the pub
uty requirement. once for all. il is
oroposcd by the Republican organiza-
tim TO make precedent as to whether
,,i,ure 70 observe the law disqualiiics
candidate from taking seat in Con-
gress
II seems fairly clear that Mr., Mac
nonald the Progressive who won "a
,aurslity of the votes in the upper pcn>
,rsula was guilty of at least techni-
cal violation of the publicity law Mr..
uann has been advised that MacDon-
,lds failure was much more than tech
meal The law requires two state
ments The first must he filed not more
than fifteen days and not less than ten
DAYS orior TO election. The second
must be filed within thirty days after
lection The law specifies the extent
If detail which must be given in the
statements II requires that contribu-
,ions be stated. with the source whence
secured.
Filed Various Statements,
Mr.. Macdonald filed "a preliminary
statement oct. Is. 1912. This brought
Linn within the law. This first state
ncnt gave lis expenses as $500 in II
bmp sum II was declared that the
money WAS spent for railroad fare,
travelling expenses. literature, postage,
telesraphnC and I'm no other way. II
gave no statement of contributions,
though 1t appeared from n later state
mcn that contribution was made to
the Macdonald campaign. Most Of the
expenditures mentioned in the general
classification by Mr. Macdonald were
Of the sort which are not required to
be published at ALL under the law.
Following this statement, nothing is
on hlc from Macdonald until April II,
1915 The time for filing the final cx-
pensc statement expired bee. ;. 1912.
The statement of April II divided the
Macdonald expenses into two classiii-
cations. The first item covered travel
Inc expenses and hotel bills; amount,
$3.50. The second item was $40. for
printing Nothing was said in this
statement about any contribution.
Three days later, April "a, another
statement was filed by Mr. Macdonald.
In tlhy statement appeared for the first
time the Cart that Macdonald received
$500 from the congressional campaign
committee George Shiras. secretary.
Press For Final Decision.
1t is the view of the Republican lead
ershp that the case against MacDon-
aid should not rest upon technicali-
y at least that it Is the way II is put
The question is whether the failure of
Mr. Macdonald constitutes "A serious
and vital failure, or whether IL falls
within the classification of technicality.
It Is clear that the present disposition
Bto regard the matter seriously and to
press for a decision upon that basis.
The view of the Republican leader
ship is that, regardless of partisanship
lhcle must be "A decision on that point.
The Democrats have busted two Re-
puhlcans because too much money
was Spclt FOR their election. Thereon
'atlin was kicked ont of the last Con
Sress because his father spent money
IN excess of the amount permitted by
ne Missouri laws. Charles &. Bowman
" Pennsl lvania was oustcd because he
was charged with having spent too
much The point upon which emphasis
placed Is that Congress has no OIL
'dl way of determining tho amount
spent unless candidates file expense ac~
counts IN complete form and on time
u man Is To- be oustcd because he
spent too much and Is not Ia he ousted
No tallS to file a statement ut all,
u'arly' according tn the Republican
viewpoint the members who have
UanSsresscd will simply fail To file cx-
Pehse statements and will thus get off
without penalty
90 The Macdonald case Is apparently
" 90 fought out ON the campaign pub
lefty issue.