Arizona republican., 1922-05-12
ERRED
ON CAMERON
INDICTMENT
IS ARGUMENT.
Defense Attorneys Claim
Only Cause For Action
Is Under The Corrupt
Practices Act

If there is to be any prosecution
of Z. S. Senator Ralph II Cameron
it should be had under the corrupt
practices act rather than under the
old federal statute governing cam
paign expenditures of candidate for
the United States congress. counsel
for Senator Cameron told Judge w.
c. Van Fleet in federal court here
yesterday in closing arguments on a
demurrer to an Indictment for per-
jury. The indictment. containing
two counts. accuses the senator of
having sworn to statement Of cam
paign receipts in the 1920 election
which failed to list contributions to-
falling more than $4,000.
The statute under which the in.
dictment is brought no longer is APP
plicable to congressional candidate
since 1t has been superseded by the
seventeenth amendment to the con-
stitution, providing for the election
of senators and representatives by a
direct vote of the people, counsel
argued. The statute in question,
which governs the filing of campaign
receipts and expenditures. was APP
plicable only in the days when con-
gressional delegates were elected by
NA4C AN6 4S4cltuiG VI the several states
and since legislatures no longer elect
such delegates. the statute no longer
applies, counsel for the senator con-
tended
Finish Arguments Today
United States District Attorney
Frederick Bernard and his assistant,
Francis b. Cradle, announced at
court adjournment yesterday they
would finish arguments today, prob
ably at the morning session. Judge
Van Fleet, sitting for William II.
Sawtelle, then will rule on the de-
murrer or take the matter under ad-
visement. If the demurrer Is over
ruled, the senator's trial will begin at
once.
The argument of Attorney NJ. L.
Partridge of Globe, who, with F. C.
Jacobs. represents Senator Cameron,
occupied both court sessions yester-
day. Three salient points in the arr
gument Of Attorney Partridge were:
That a notary public. before whom
Senator Cameron sW ore TO the state
ments in question. was not a proper
officer authorized by law to admin
lister such an oath and therefore
no perjury was committed.
That the seventeenth Amendment
to the United States constitution,
providing for the election of senators
and representatives by a direct vote
of the electorate conflicts with the
provisions of the federal statute pro-
viding for the election of senators
by the state legislatures of the sew
eral states and therefore repeals such
statute.
That the matter alleged to be false
is not material matter in that it
concerns campaign receipts and not
expenditures and therefore is not
subject to perjury.
Law Limits Expenditures
Counsel for Senator Cameron fur
ther argued that there is nothing in
the 18th constitutional amendment
that requires candidate for the
United States senate to file a pre-
election statement regarding cam
paign receipts. The law. Mr.. Part
ridge emphasized. does not limit the
amount of campaign contribution but
does limit the expenditure of such
funds. The most that can be claimed
for returns on campaign receipts is
that it is matter of investigation,
he argued. citing several authorities
in support of his contention
In the second place. counsel con-
tended, . notary public is not a
proper officer to take oaths regarding
such returns. Such an oath could be
administered only by United States
officer or some one especially author
lied by the United States law to so
act
The first count of the indictment
is fatally defective, Mr. Partridge
argued. in that it is brought under
a statute no longer applicable and
because there is nothing in the law
that required the defendant to file
pre- election returns with anyone save
the secretary Of the senate.
Senator Cameron was in the court
room throughout both the morning
and afternoon sessions. He listened
intently to the arguments of his
lawyer.
Assistant United States District
Attorney Cradle had just opened ar
gument for the government when
adjournment was taken. He dis
agreed with Mr.. Partridges assertion
regarding notaries and cited author
tiles in an effort to prove that no.
taries are empowered by federal stat
utes to administer an oath of that
nature.