The New York herald., 1922-01-12

the Senate was whether a seat on the
floor OF the Senate could be obtained
by such corrupt and unlawful practices.
Senator Hitchcock (Neb.) said Sena-
tor Newberrys campaign was regarded
| by his own State as in violation or the
! law. He believed il was not a party
question, as the Democrats have nothing
to gain by throwing Newberry out OF
| the Senate"
THE Republican majority is painfully
| large" Senator Hitchcock said. "anc
will not suffer one particle by cepriv-
| ing Newberry of his seat. Neither is II
a personal question. as Newberry is well
| liked by every member. and II Senators
followed their personal inclinations they
would vote almost unanimously to seat
him. but IL he is seated we impair the
confidence of the public In the Senate
| and do irreparable damage to the cause
| of government in the United States
The case is absorbing public attention
| and people everywhere are asking
whether il is possible to buy seat
here"
Asserting that Senator Newberry HIM
self was not on trial but that 1t is the
Senate which is on trial. Senator Hitch
| cock continued:
"The eyes of the country are fixed
on the Senate TO see how it is going no
decide this case. II we say that $780,
900 can be expended in the election OF
one Senator then 1t can be expended
for every Senator. We give notice TO
the country that seats in this body are
for sale to the highest bidder. We ex-
pect the people to respect the laws we
pass. How can we expect them to re-
spect those laws IL we permit seats In
this body to be sold? Public opinion
all over the country will be that the
expenditure OF 100000 for ii Senate
seat constitutes national scandal.
"It is the duty OF the Senate to pro-
test itself against the outrageous and
scandalous use OF money in the election
of it's members. If the Senate votes to
seat him 1t gives ratification to all acts
of the committee which expended this
enormous sum TO bring about his cleo
ton. The substance OF the whole case
is that Newberry was not elected to
the Senate, 100000 was elected, and
that is the way the people will re-
gard it,
Senator Reed (Mo) said the New
berry case demonstrated that IL the COM
mon people cannot get office, at least
they can get the coin. He scored his
colleague, Senator Spencer, for arguing
that the people of Michigan have made
no move to prosecute Senator Newberry,
pointing out mat IN keeping WIN GUS
tom the State Government took no action
because the Federal authorities had
taken charge of the case.
He asserted: ITO argue that New
berry knew nothing about the large sums
spent in his behalf is to say in substance
that he does not possess enough mem
tality to go from this chamber to his
hotel. 1t requires an unusual amount of
piety and grace for man to look at
the evidence In this case and then to
conclude that Newberry knew nothing
about the management of his campaign
or the vest sums spent to elect him."
Referring tc the fact that Newberry
did not take the stand Senator Reed
said: II have tried enough cases to
know why a defendant is kept off the
stand. 1t is either because one is afraid
he will break down under the cross-ex-
animation or because ne is too conscien
tious to tell a story"
Before the Senate adjourned those
favoring the resolution to reject Senator
Newberry said they probably would
take steps tomorrow to have the whole
case referred back to the Senate Com
mittee on Elections and Privileges so
that Senator Newberry could appear In
person and respond to some pertinent
questions which have come up during
the discussion of the case on the floor
Of the Senate.