New Mexico state record. (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1914-19??, 1921-12-30
NO FRAUD EVER SHOWN
IN CASE OF SENATOR
NEWBERRY OF MICHIGAN

OF political capital of the basest char
acter the Democrats in the United
States Senate, in cooperation with the
Democratic national organization, are
trying t O make it appear that Senator
Truman H. Newberry, of Michigan,
was nominated and elected by fraud
and corruption and in violation OF
the penal statutes of his own state and
of the federal government.
The most significant thing in CON
nection with the Democratic uproar
over Senator Newberry's seat in the
Senate is the fact that at no time
during the debate and at no place
in the report filed by the Democra-
tic minority of the Senate committee
which investigated the Newberry case,
has any Democrat been able to show
any specific instance in which Sem
ator Newberry or his campaign man
ayers were guilty of fraud and cor
ruption, either in connection with his
nomination or his election.
Charges Absolutely False
This fact is stressed in the report
made to the Senate by the majority
Of the committee which investigated
Senator Newberry's nomination and
election. This committee had before
it more than 1890 pages of typewrit-
ten testimony taken at the trial OF
Senator Newberry in the federal court
at Grand Rapids, Michigan. 1t had
the bill of exceptions presented to the
Supreme Court of the United States
on the appeal following the trial, which
bill of exceptions contained $50 print
ed pages and the summary of the tes-
timony of owe 800 witnesses. All of
this is made a part of the Senate
committees report.
In addition the Senate committee
heard witnesses on its w initiative.
1t also ordered a recount of all of
the ballots. In its report to the SEN
ate it says, regarding the charges OF
fraud and corruption:
These charges were vigorously made
under oath and were vigorously in
sisted upon by contestant (Henry
Ford through his counsel before the
recount of the ballots and were al
capable of specific proof if they were
true.
"All the submitted evidence was
carefully examined, and at great ex-
pense of time and money all the bal
lots (429,83o in number) were re-ex-
amined with the result that every
such charge of illegal voting or count
ing, or of fraudulent returns, OF brib-
cry, or intimidation, was not alone
p in fact, but was so manifest
" unsupported by evidence as to pro-
duce the irresistible conclusion that
these charges were the result of a
reckless attempt to make some i'm
preston by the seriousness of the
charges, when it must have been
known that they were entirely UNI
founded.
No Evidence to Back Up Charges
in fact, so totally failing is the
proof to sustain any OF the said
charges of the contestant (Henry
Ford) with regard to the general ell
ection that there is 10 to be found
ever a reference to such charges in
the briefs filed by the contestant.
mo claim has ever been made al
any time that an excessive amount
of money was used at the general
election or that there was any i'm
proper use of money at the general
election. The evidence does not give
support to sustain any charge OF fraud
or illegality, bribery or intimidation
OF voters in connection with the gen
eral election"
In connection with the nomination
D of Senator Newberry in the primari-
es the majority report of the Sen
ate committee says that, notwithstand-
ing the charge is made that there
800 -, ,,,1a,rf,,t ,Yea h,r Truman II
Newberry and his agents, of large
sums OF money to influence the pri-
mary elections in the state of Mich
gan at which Senator Newberry was
nominated on the Republican ticket
fails to sustain any such charges. The
committees report says:
NO man can read the record in
this case and fairly com TO any 9th
er conclusion. The charges, which
have been bitterly made and vehem-
entity urged, are wholly unsustained
Witnesses Cleared Newberry
I'VE are asked to brand practically
every witness who appeared land all
OF them on the summons of the con-
t~estant, Henry Ford) as either a will
full perjurer or a man unworthy OF be-
lief. Every witness produced was
called by the contestant, who, under
the usual rules of procedure, is pre-
sumed to vouch for the credibility
of the witnesses he produces. Some
Of the witnesses were men of the
highest standing and character in the
industrial world and in official life.
There was nothing in their conduct
or in their appearance, or in their
testimony, to indicate that they were
not fully and frankly telling the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the
truth. The conclusion at which the
contestant Henry Ford would have
your committee arrive are those which
the contestant bases entirely upon
unwarranted differences and upon the
merest eohjectures, and are without
the testimony of a single witness &c
sustain them.
we are Urged 10 disregard practic.
ally the entire testimony produced by
the witnesses of the contestant him
self as beng utterly lacking in ere
dibility, If not wilfully false, and t.
substitute for such testimony the base
les suspicious and unfounded charg
6 which the contestant is pleased t
make. We are asked to arrive a
false conclusions and to sustain IN
temperate charges which have roth
ing except mere allegation TO sup
port them. 1t is difficult to imagine
case more severely charged and NOR
completely unsustained than is pre-
sented in this proceeding
No Money Spent Corruptly
Regarding the amount OF mone-
spent bv Senator Newberry's manag
ers in the primary campaign, whicl
resulted in his nomination, the mai
ority report of the Senate investis