Evening star., 1950-12-21
The Political Mill
The Political Mill
Senate Move to Block
Butler Seating Weighed
COP. Senators Would Fight
Any Such Attempt
By Gould Lincoln


By Gould Lincoln
Should Senator be denied q
seat In the Senate Of the United States
if 1t Is proved that he or his campaign
aides. with his consent, used scurrilous
and fraudulent campaign literature in
his campaign?
Senator Tydings. Democrat, Of Mary
land. who was defeated in November by
Senator-elect John Marshall Butler, Re
publican. seemed to be laying the ground
for contest to deny Mr.. Butler admis-
sion to the Senate in recent letter Mr.,
Iydings wrote to Senator Gillette, Demo-
crat. OF Iowa, chairman of a subcomnit-
tee OF the Senate Rules Committee. In
that letter Mr.. Tydings charged that Mr..
Butler had used fraudulent campaign
literature to deceive the voters. He said
that II Senator'S -elect-as in the case Of
ware OF Pennsylvania and Smith of
Ilinois-could be denied seats in the
Senate because Of excessive campaign
expenditures. 1t was logical to hold that
Senator-elect could be denied a seat
because he had used fraudulent Iitera-
ture In his campaign.
However, 1t appears that Senator
Iyd1ngs Is not engineering any attempt
to halt Mr.. Butler at the threshold of
the Senate, when Mr.. Butler presents
himself at the opening of the 82d Con-
gress on January 8. Mr.. Tydings ex-
plains that he was seeking in his letter
to Senator Gillette an amendment to
the corrupt practices act which wouk
deal effectively with fraudulent cam
pa1gn literature, used by any candidate
for the Senate in the future.
No Contests Involved.
The Senate Rules subcommittee of
which Senator Gillette is chairman, is
looking into charges of the use of sour
rllous and fraudulent campaign litera-
ture In the 1850 elections in a number
OF States. including Maryland, Utah and
Ohio. The members of the subcomuait-
tee insist that their investigation was
undertaken with the definite under
standing that no contests were involved.
Unless the subcommittee changes its
mind in the Maryland case and itself
demands that Butler stand aside, Mr..
Butler seems safe.
The Tydings-Browder composite pic
ture is before the subcommittee.
Republican Senators would resist to
the full any attempt to deny Mr.. Butler
a seat in the upper house on the OPEN
ing OF Congress. The campaign made
against Senator Tydings was in part
based on assertions that Mr.. Tydings.
as chairman of the committee investi-
eating the Mccarthy charges of Com
munism in the State Department, had
done a whitewashing job These ac-
cusations Of white-washing were vehe-
mently denied by Mr.. Tydings-and his
complaints against Mr.. Butler 90 to
advertisements in newspapers and PAM
phlets which sought to convince the
voters that Senator Tydings had been
delinquent. Mr.. Butler won by about
$4,000 votes. He insists that everything
that Senator Tydings has brought up
in his letter to Senator Gillette was
threshed out in the campaign, and the
people had decided against Mr.. Tydings.
Libel Laws Applicable.
How far Congress could go in limiting
either speeches or published campaign
documents is question that is puzzling
the committee itself. The libel laws are
at present the only recourse a candidate
has who thinks he is being treated un-
fairly
In 1946. when former Senator Wheeler
OF Montana. Democrat, was defeated
by John E. Erickson in the senatorial
primaries, subcommittee of the old
Privileges and Elections Committee Of
the Senate investigated book attack
ing Mr.. Wheeler, used in the campaign.
So scurrilous and ibelous did the COM
mittee find this book that it was turned
over by the committee to the Justice
Department, with a recommendation
that a criminal libel action be initiated
against those responsible for it. Nothing
came of their action, however. Mr..
Erickson was defeated in the general
election that year by Senator Ecton,
Republican.
The cases against William S. Ware of
Pennsylvania and Frank L. Smith Of
Illinois, two Republicans who were
denied seats in the Senate, after they
had been elected, because of excessive
and improper use of money in their
campaigns, grew out of the 1926 elec-
tions. A special Senate investigating
committee, headed by the late Senator
James A. Reed. Democrat, of Missouri,
reported on each case. It found that
huge expenditures had been made for
both men. In the case of Mr.. Smith.
who was chairman of the Public Utilities
Commission of Illinois, it was shown that
Samuel insult, head of many utilities.
and the public utilities, had contributed
more than 100000 to his campaign.