The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1914-05-29
The Lorimer Case in the
United States Senate.

On August 8. 1908. the Illinois SEN
atoriaI primary resulted in the nomi-
nation OF Albert ]. Hopkins (republi-
CAM and Lawrence B. Stringer (dem-
ocrat) as candidates of their respec-
tive parties for the United States SEN
atorship.
VIM. Lorimer was not a candidate
in this primary. his name not even
being on the ballot.
on May Is. 1909, the Illinois legis-
lature. by corruption and fraud, elected
VIM Lorimer TO the United States
senate Even before the roll call was
ended, the election Of Lorimer was
challenged and the charge of corrup-
ton was made on the floor of the leg
islature
ON June is, 1909, Lorimer took his
seat in the United States senate. but
the entire nation rang with the scan
dal which attended his election.
On March l, 1911, after an investi-
CATION which failed to urearth all the
evidence and which was decided large
ly by partisan politics, the senate by
a vote of as to 40, eXonerated the
Lorimer election of the fraud which
had been charged
On July 10, 1912, after an aroused
public sentiment had forced the senate
TO reopen the case, Lorimer's seat in
the senate was declared vacant on
the ground that he had r. raiyed his
election through corrupt methods and
practices" The vote was % for Lori
mer and 55 against him-an adverse
vote of nearly two to one.
This in brief is the history of the
Lorimer case.
Senator Fletcher and those who de
Tended and voted for Loriner say they
did so because there was no evidence
to show that he himself was connected
with the corrupt methods employed in
his election and that public sentiment
was Influenced against him by a Chi
cago newspaper.
The explanation is a singular one
and Is probably the best that could be
made. but 1t does not explain the fact
that from one end of this country to
the other, public sentiment was and is
yet firmly fixed in the conviction that
/ Lorlmer WAS elected by corrupt
methods, and the only defense that
could be made in his favor was pre-
scented by hair splitting lawyers on
/ purely technical grounds.
The old cry Of the Lortmer defend
ers that you didn't hear or read the
I 5000 pages Of evidence and conse-
/ Guently YOU are not competent to
! Judge of the methods of his election
is a subterfuge pure and simple. or
course the vast majority of people did
not either hear or read all Of this
; evidence
I But the senate of the United States
was so thoroughly persuaded of the
| corruption of Lorimer's election that
of the So members who voted on the
F., question 55-or almost two to one
voted to declare his seat vacant.
+ And the people of OF the United
! States are so thoroughly convinced of
| the corruption Of the Lorimer election
that the senator's who voted in his
! favor have been retired to the shades
OF private life as fast as new elections
have been possible.
Even Lorimer's own colleague from
the state of Illinois voted against him,
and the people Of Illinois themselves
elected new man to Llor!mer's seat
as soon as Lorimer himself left the
senate.
Surely his home people could have
vindicated Lorimer's election by again
electing him had he been the man they
honestly desired to have in the senate.
Surely a Chicago newspaper could not
have corrupted public sentiment of the
whole state of Illinois and Of the whole
nation II tire methods which resulted
in Lorimer's election were so clean
and chaste as Senator Fletcher and
other defenders of Lorimer would have
YOU believe.
In this connection it Is a fact worthy
- OF note that the chief newspa per de-
fender of Lorimer in Chicago some
time ago passed into the hands OF
receiver and was just recently alb
sorbed by another paper and put out
of business entirely. Surely, II Lori
mer's cause was so virtuous, public
sentiment would not have let his
newspaper spokesman expire for lack
of support.
Senator F1etcher's explanation in his
address in Pensacola Thursday night
did not answer any of these facts nor
can any of Lorimer's defenders answer
them.
The fact is that Ioriner represented