Evening star., 1921-05-02
NEWBERRY VERDICT
ORDERED SET ASIDE
BY SUPREME COURT
Michigan Senator Wins His
Battle in Case Based
on Election Charges.
CONGRESS HAS NO POWER
TO REGULATE PRIMARIES
Conviction of Michigan Man and
16 Others Reversed-Dissenting
Views as to Principle.


Conviction of United States Senator
Truman II. Newberry in federal courts
in Michigan of conspiracy to violate
the federal corrupt practices act was
set aside today by the Supreme Court
The conviction of sixteen other de-
f.ndas.. a.so was set aside. The
vprrt f,s;i that Congress was without
pcwer +, regulate primaries.
;asliee McReynolds read the opln'
ton. - which Justice Mckenna with
held his opinion, to. as to ,he power vi
Congress- but agreed as to the decision
chief Justice White also disSented
from the decision that Congress did
not have power to control all e!ec.
lions. but agreed that the statute hao
beess "xvosa,v ui:construed.
L0wer Court. Error.
5catSce McReynolds said that the
slNwnr court erred in dismisslnS the
demurrer of the defendants
obviously the corrupt practices act
covers also the primaries and other
preliminary acts preceding an election,
the court said. "The one question here
is whether Congress may limit expen.
ditures of a candidate The source OIL
/. of the Constitution. This gives
Congress the power of regulating the
manner of holding elections and not
of elections.
Chief Justfce whites View.
Chief Justice White. in his. disse mt
ing opinion, traced in detail the
growth of the election system 10 sno"
that Congress was given the power
under the Constitution to regulate
senatorial elections.
1T is essentially a federal matter.
not existing before the Constitution.
he said.
Predicts New Legislation.
Chief Justice VIII te predicted that
legislation would come which would
set aside today's decision as to the
power of Congress over primaries. for
otherwise government cannot live"
He called attention to those states
in which the primary had been made
the controlling feature of the cleo
tion. In such cases. he said. election
is stillborn and the vote without
power or weight
The direct election mendment to
the Constitution has not changed the
provisions of section 4. article 1. Of
lns; document. the court held.
Associate Justice Pitney also read
the courts decision. and announced
that Associate Justices Brandeis and
clarke had concurred in the opinion
he filed.
Would Have New Trial.
Chief Justice White said he con-
CURED in the reversal OF the cOnvic-
ton. but thought that a new trial
should be held.
News Of the Newberry decision
reached the Senate chamber in the
midst of a heated argument between
Senator Underwood. democrat. Ala
bsma. and Senator Penrose of Penn
sylvania. and other republican SEN
-aF4 LII
mittee.
Immediately senators gathered in
groups in the rear of the chamber.
manifesting undisguised interest in
the ruling of the court.
Upon learning OF the court decision
Chairman Dillingham; Of the Senate
elections committee. which has charge
of the Ford-Newberry contest. said
that the committee would meet in a
few days to consider the effect of the
courts decision on future Senate
action.
Senator Dillingham; said it appeared
that with the corrupt practice law
held void the committee would be
without further Jurisdiction.
History Of Case Outlined.s
The case Of United States Senator
Truman H. Newberry of Michigan
and sixteen OF his political associates
reached the Supreme Court Of the
United States from the federal dis
trict court at Grand Rapids. Mich.
where the appellants were found
guilty March 20. 1920. of criminal
conspiracy to violate the federal cor
rupt practices act.
The senator was sentenced by the
district judge. Clarence w. Sessions
to two years Imprisonment at Fort
Leavenworth and fined $4,000. This
the extreme penalty of the law. also
was placed against two others. the
remaining sentences running down
to a fine of $1,000.
The case started with I35 indct- :
ments returned at Grand Rapids No
vember %. 1919. 1t was called for
trial January 81. 1920. and lasted
eight weeks. eighty-fve Of the orig
inal list Of defendants being still be-
fore the bar when the jury retired
one man was granted a separate tria
because of illness and one was never
arrested. having gone to South Amer
iCa before the indictments were re-
turned. Twenty-three were dismissed
on motion of Frank G. Daley spe-
ciaI assistant attorney general. at the
close Of the government testimony on
March 2. 1920. and the next day
Judge Sessions freed fifteen more
Seventeen were found guilty. sixty
eight acquitted and the cases Of ten
who pleaded nolo contendere were
dismissed after the jury returned its
verdict.
All the convicted men have been a,
liberty on bonds since their indictment
Charge Against Newberry.
The specific charge against Senator
Ncwberry was that between December
J. 1917. and November ). 1918, he ''un
lawfully and feloniously did conspire
combine. confederate and agree with
divers persons" to violate the act o.
June %. 1910. by contributing sum,
apEregating 100000 toward the ex
penSes of his nomination and election
II was not necessary. the government
asserted. that Newberry should actual
~ give this amount or that he shoulc
have had personal supervision of it:
expenditure. but il was sufficient il h.
had guilty knowledge that contribu
tons to an illegal aggregate were be
Ing accepted for the purpose in view
No less than 153 alleged errors wer,
assigned" by the defendants in theil
application for appeal to the highes
court.
The brief submitted to the Suprem,
court by Charles j.. Hughes. Martin
W. Littleton. George l.. Nichols ant
James o. Murfin. counsel for Newberr,
and the sixteen co defendants mad,
two distinct attacks on the proceed
4 iugs at Grand Rapids. The convic
lion should be reversed. II WAS con
tended, because the statute invoke.
was not supported by any constitu
tional provision. and because, II i