Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1926-12-27
Editorial Comment
Col. Smith Should Be Seated

On. \. WOfIu)
In a letter printed elsewhere on
this page Prof. Frankfurter of the
Harvard Law School argues the
right and duty of the Senate to re-
fuse to seat Col Smith of Illinois.
He admits that 'the autonomy OF
constituency to select its own rep
resentatives must scrupulously ana
generously be kept in mind But
he denies that Congress has shown
in the past disregard OF TINS
autonomy except, perhaps, In the
Berger case" The exception is in
teresting and important. Precisely
because any action which the Sen
ate takes now may serve as a pre-
cedent, involving not only other
Smiths but other Bergers. the is
sues at stake should be stated with
as much clarity as possible.
In the Smith case the facts are
these:
l. There is pending before the
Senate 4 report of the Reed in
vestigating committee on the Illinois
primary in April. This report
charges Col Smith with spending at
least $45S,7S2 to win the primary,
70 per cent of this sum being con-
tributed by public utility corpora
lions. The report does not charge
Col. Smith with any specific act of
vote buying or of bribery. 1t does
not charge that his expenditure OF
nearly q half million dollars was in
itself a violation of the law For as
the Reed committee points out:
THE State of Illinois has no statute
restricting the amount which may be
expended by any candidate, nor any
| law requiring the candidates or their
| flo a statement
such expenditures"
| 2. Col. Smith is therefore not ac-
cused of an illegal act. He is &C
cused (a) of spending a very large
sum of money, and lb) of accepting
contributions of some 100000 from
public utility interests at a time
when he was Chairman of a State
| public utilities commission.
3. To have done these things is
| in our opinion to have done some
thing despicable. But that is a per-
sonal attitude, matter of con-
| science and not of laW-and ii IS not
/ the attitude of the voters of II
| linois. The voters of illinois have
elected Smith after hearing the
| charges brought against him. Every
! fact in the Reed report was fact
| of public knowledge at the end of
the first week in August-and three
months before the voters of Illinois
made their decision.
! 4. The duty of the Senate, in our
i opinion, is not to seek to impose its
/ own conscience on Illinois but to ask
| the only question which it is really
! entitled to ask in the circum-
| stances:
! Was the Smith campaign fund, re-
! CARELESS of its sources, used to cor
rupt the electorate of Illinois and
! did 1t thereby interfere with the
: processes of a free election?
There is no charge before the
! Senate of corruption in Illinois.
/ Smiths case in this respect is
sence of such a charge Smith should
/ be seated. The Senate should seat
! him now, and move later to deprive
him of his seat if, and only If, proof
! is forthcoming that he used his
! campaign fund corruptly in the
primary or the election.
! The World has arrived at this
conclusion reluctantly because it
has nothing but adherence for
Smiths attitude as a public utility
Commissioner toward public utility
| money. 1t hopes that if Smith is
seated the Senate, which is clearly
! the judge of the responsibilities 1t
will delegate to its own members
will give him no position OF trust
/ or confidence.
In urging that Smith be seated
! The World reverses a position which
1t took during the campaign. 1t re-
verses its position because more ma
ture elaboration has convinced it
that only by seating Smith can the
! Senate really defer to the autonomy
J of the electorate of Illinois.