The Washington times., 1922-08-21
.HUGHEG AYERS
NEWbERRY WAS
UuJUSTLYU USED
Answering Query on Elections
Case, Secretary Declares Sen
ator WrongfuIIy Convicted.
BY Universal Service

Stating that Senator Truman III.
Newberry of Michigan had suffered
a most serious injustice" in being
tried for alleged violation or the
election laws, Secretary OF state
Charles e. Hughes in a remarkable
letter made public last night re.
piled to a request for his personal
opinion in the case.
The request was contained IN
letter from the Rev. Hugh b. NC
Cauley, of Paterson. N. j., dated
August 12. in which he states:
"Allusion to the Newbery case
made from time to time by Demo
cratic speakers leads me 20 ask you
II you will not state the facts ana
the law upon which you made your
argument in the Supreme Court OF
the United States and upon which
that court decided the case.
In reply, Secretary Hughes In
letter that came as a complete sur
prise to official Washington, de-
clared that "I regret to say that
there seems to be a general mis-
conception Of the nature of the liti-
cation and It's result, and Senator
Newberry has suffered in conse-
quence a most serious injustice"
Secretary Hughes reviews the de-
cision of the court at length.
Traces Action.
He points out that Senator New
berry was indicted for violating the
Federal statutes limiting expendi-
lures by a candidate in procuring
his nomination and that In Michi-
gan this limitation was $3.50.
{ Secretary Hughes further points
mt that one of the counts In
the indictment against Newberry
charged the giving Of money to
persons to vote for Newberry and
to withhold their vote from Henry
Ford, Newberry's opponent for the
Senatorial nomination.
On both these charges. Mr..
Hughes declares in his letter, the
Supreme Court overruled the find
ings.
No evidence was produced to sus.
tain the latter charge. even In the
trial court. said Hughes. With re-
gard to the conviction Of Senator
Newberry in the lower court on
the charge of expending more. cam
paign money than alloewd by law
Secretary Hughes states:
'It should be borne in mind that
Senator Newberry's conviction in
any charge of fraud or corruption
or for the use of money for any
illegal purpose or Of any act in
volving moral turpitude."
Thus, the question came down
TO one point. Secretary Hughes ex.
plains. This was the expenditure,
or conspiracy to expend, an amount
of money in excess of the statutory
limit of $3.50; that was all that
was left of the case" he states.
Upon Senator Newberry's convtc-
ton in the lower court upon this
charge, the Supreme Court held the
statute unconstitutional when the
case was appealed. SecretaryHughes
concludes:
1.-THE conviction of Senator New:
berry was obtained under a statute
held by a majority of the Supreme
Court to be invalid; rested upon a
ground which did not involve any
finding by the jury Of moral turpi.
tude and was effected only by q
most serious misconstructioh Of the
statute which exposed him to con-
viction.
"The plain fact is that Senator
Eewberry was wrongly and most un'
Justly convicted and his conviction
was set aside. Despite the long
period of preparation. the rigid in.
vestigation, the careful choosing OF
their ground, the long drawn out
trial. the attempt in every possible
way to besmirch, and the zeal, abil
ity, and even bitterness Of his pur.
suers, their endeavor to establish a
violation of law on the part OF Sen.
ator Newberry completely failed and
!, accordingly Senator Newberry stood
as a Senator duly elected by the
people of the State of Michigan and
entitled to his seat in the Senate of
the United States"