Evening star., 1932-03-27
PR|TCHARD FILES
BRIEF IN CONTEST
Summary of Fight Against
Senator Bailey Given to
Elections Committee.
~ the Associated Press.

ny the Associated Press.
Contending sufieient grounds had
been presented to Justify an irlvestiga-
tion Of the 1880 North Carolina cleo
ton, attorneys for George M. Prit-
chard Of Asheville today filed with the
Senate Elections Committee a brief
summing up his fight to unseat Sen
ator Josiah w Bailey, Democrat.
Robert H. MCNEIL OF washington,
chief of Pritchard's counsel in the year.
old contest, presented the brief, which
asserts Pritcharo would have been
elected had the vote been legally cast
and fairly counted and had all voters
been free from coercion. =" He urged
senatorial inquiry.
The committee, which has before it
Pritchard's original and amended petit
tions charging widespread election
frauds, and Bailey's replies to each, is
whether the allegations warrant SEN
atorial investigation.
Says Bailey Demurs.
Bailey's answer to the amended peti-
ton filed last week by McNeill for
Pritchard, contended the allegations
were too general and termed them a
drag net description adding that
Pritchard had not presented sufficient
grounds for an inquiry or facts to show
he would have been elected.
To the charges on the original petit
ton, McNeill asserted in the brief,
"Senator Bailey demurs," adding:
las all lawyers understand, by de-
murring, all the facts alleged are
admitted"
Bailey's position, the brief said. was
that assuming the charges to be true
he urged they should not be investigated.
The brief continued: "It is not believed
that this committee expects contestant
(Pritchard) to lay before it, in advance
of an investigation positive proof
in the way of dispositions, afidavits or
other evidence"
be alleged In the proceedings, McNeill
said, adding no senatorial precedent had
ever required more than specifications
of frauds or violations of law as raise
seriously the question of the right of
a person holding seat in the United
States Senate to continue in such posi-
ton, or the probable right of the con-
testant to succeed him In such position,
or the probable prevalence of such wide
spread fraud in the election that neither
party to the controversy should occupy
such seat"
Cites Three Cases.
When a contest is brought in good
faith under these circumstances Nc
Neill said, "every rule of ethics and
law demands that 1t should be prose-
cuted to the fullest hearing and de-
cision so that the integrity and elec-
ton of every person occupying q seat
in the Senate of the United States
should be beyond question"
McNeill cited the Wilson-Vare con-
test from Pennsylvania; the Bursum-
Bratton contest from New Mexico and
the Hef1in Bankhead contest now pend
ing before the committee, as support
ing his contentious.
The Pritchard charges are specific,
McNeill said, asserting that the petit
ton of former Senator Heflin in con-
testing the election of Senator Bank
head, Democrat, of Alabama, docs not
go so far in detailing the offenses
against the rights of voters or in viola
tions of State laws "
In neither the Wilson-Vare case nor
the Hefiin- -Bankhead contest, the brief
claimed, was it necessary for the con-
testant to prove his own election or
that the Senator holding the seat was
not elected.
A brief in reply is expected by the
committee from Bailey on Monday.