The Senator from Ohio [MR. HANNA] says that if he spent his time in answering such charges as that he would take up more of the time of the Senate than the Senator from Georgia [MR. BACON] consumes, as though that were an No wonder that the Senator from Ohio makes that reply; no wonder that he gives that as his answer to the charge, for if he should spend his time in answering similar charges to those contained in the document which I hold in my hand, and if he spent time enough to convince the American people that the facts herein stated are untrue, he would spend a great deal more time in this body than is consumed by the Senator from Georgia.

I hold in my hand the report of the Committee on Privileges and Elections of the Senate on the election of M. A. HANNA to this body. The minority report of this committee is signed by Senators TURLEY, PETTUS, and CAFFERY. I will first read from the report of the majority:

The Committee on Privileges and Elections, to which was referred the certified copy of the report of the committee appointed by the Senate of Ohio to investigate the charges of bribery in the election of Hon. MARCUS A. HANNA to the Senate of the United States, having considered the same, report back to the Senate said certified copy, and further report as follows:

This certified copy of the report of the Senate of Ohio, being a typewritten document, was presented to the United States Senate by the Vice-President on May 28, 1898, having been received by him through the mails, and was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections on motion of the Senator from Colorado [MR. TELLER], but no order for printing was made. It has, however, been put in type for the use of the committee. The contents of the certified copy are the "Report of the committee appointed by the Senate of Ohio," including the testimony, of which 500 copies were printed by the Ohio Senate, and the report further ordered to be printed in the appendix of the State Senate journal.

The closing paragraph of the report, signed by the chairman and three members, recommends its adoption by the State Senate, and that a copy thereof, with the testimony, "be transmitted to the President of the Senate of the United States, of which Senator HANNA is a member, for such action as it may deem advisable." The clerk of the State Senate in certifying on May 26, 1898, that the papers transmitted

were a true and correct copy of the report of the committee, adds as to the report the words "and adopted by the Ohio Senate."

From the above statement it will be seen that no direct remonstrance, memorial, or protest setting out that Mr. HANNA was not elected Senator or that he ought to be expelled, coming from parties asserting readiness to prosecute their charges, has been presented to the Senate. Nor has the reception on May 28, 1898, of the certified copy of the State Senate report been followed up by any appearance before this committee of any prosecuting parties or by the submission to the committee of any additional papers from any source. Nevertheless the committee have given an examination to the report of the Ohio State Senate committee, the points of the same, concisely stated, being as follows:

The specific charge is what the committee call "four main facts" stated in language as follows:

I have read that much from the report of the majority of the committee for the purpose of showing that they start off by saying that no one appeared in an authoritative way from the State of Ohio to prosecute the case, and so the majority report in favor of Mr. HANNA.

Now I will read from the report submitted by the Senator from Tennessee [MR. TURLEY], from the minority of the Committee on Privileges and Elections, as follows:

IN THE MATTER OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF OHIO TO INVESTIGATE THE CHARGES OF BRIBERY IN THE ELECTION OF HON. M. A. HANNA TO THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

We cannot concur in the report of the majority of the Committee on Privileges and Elections in the matter of the report of the committee appointed by the Senate of the State of Ohio to investigate the charges of bribery in the election of Hon. M. A. HANNA to the Senate of the United States.

The charge is that early in January, 1898, an attempt was made by H. H. Boyce and others to bribe John C. Otis, a member of the house of representatives of the general assembly of the State of Ohio, to vote for MARCUS A. HANNA for the Senate of the United States.

Among other things, the majority of the committee say:

"Moreover, it seems clear to this committee that it would not be ( justified in recommending any action to be taken by the Senate without further testimony to be taken by the committee. The question whether additional evidence should be taken has been the only difficult ques

tion which the committee has considered. It is clear that Mr. Otis never had any intention of yielding to bribery. He encouraged Mr. Boyce by the advice of others only in order to entrap him. Then he carefully withdrew and substituted his attorney, Mr. Campbell, to continue the negotiations. Mr. Campbell labored to induce Mr. Boyce to offer money, and finally, as he says, obtained $1,750 from him as part payment on $3,500 to be paid for Mr. Otis's vote for Mr. HANNA, leaving $6,500 to be paid if Mr. HANNA was elected. At this point public exposure, through Mr. Otis, Mr. Campbell, and their associates, took place. Mr. Boyce disappeared, and the incident was closed.

"That Mr. Boyce, operating in Cincinnati, where Mr. Otis lives, had relations with Mr. HANNA'S representatives at Columbus, the State capital, the State Senate committee undertook to prove by the evidence of various detectives, professional and amateur, who listened at telephone wires and shadowed Mr. Boyce, Mr. Hollenbeck, and others. The effort of the committee was carefully and skillfully made. It was not wholly devoid of results; it raises pregnant suspicion that Mr. HANNA's representatives at Columbus knew what Mr. Boyce was doing. But this whole line of inquiry would require verification by testimony to be taken by the Committee on Privileges and Elections before that committee would be willing to found conclusions thereon."

The quotation which I have just read is from the report of the majority of the committee. Now, we will see what the minority further say:

The attempt on the part of Boyce to buy Otis's vote for Mr. HANNA is clearly proven by Campbell, who, from his testimony, seems to have been a lawyer of large practice. One thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars was paid in cash by Boyce to Campbell as attorney for Otis. Boyce agreed to pay $1,750 more when Otis reached Columbus and a balance of $6,500 if Mr. HANNA was elected.

We will now refer to portions of the evidence before the committee of the State Senate of Ohio bearing upon the relations existing between Mr. Boyce while at Cincinnati and Mr. HANNA'S representatives at Columbus. It is shown that Mr. HANNA and Majors Dick and Rathbone

This is the school in which Rathbone was educated, it appears, and became familiar with the ideas of "benevolent assimilation."

It is shown that Mr. HANNA and Majors Dick and Rathbone (Dick and Rathbone being managers for Mr. HANNA) were at the

Neil House in Columbus, Ohio, where Mr. HANNA had his headquarters, for a part of three weeks preceding January 12, 1898. The private telephone used in Mr. HANNA's headquarters was No. 1092.

Otis testifies that on Friday, January 7, 1898, about 11 o'clock, he was called up over the telephone from the Great Southern Hotel at Columbus by a General Boyce. He had never heard of Boyce before. Boyce stated that he "had come on from New York to see Otis on important business and had reached Columbus on Wednesday about two hours after Otis had left."

The result of the conversation was that Boyce and Otis agreed to meet at the Gibson House that evening. Later in the day Boyce telegraphed Otis that he would reach Cincinnati at 5:30 o'clock. Otis says he met Boyce at the Gibson House between 5:30 and 6 o'clock that evening and had a conversation with him in which the Senatorial question was discussed, and they agreed to meet again the next evening. Myers, a clerk at the Gibson House, testified that at about 6:40 p. m. on the 7th of January a call came over the telephone from Columbus for General Boyce, but he could not be found at the time. It was repeated a little later on, at which time General Boyce was standing in the lobby. He was at once called to the telephone in the hotel office. Myers said he heard Boyce say, "Hello, Major Dick!" and speak of HANNA being sore.

I will read it all.

This conversation, as far as he heard it, Myers says he repeated to the manager of the hotel, who told him if Boyce wished to use the telephone again to arrange for him to use the one in the manager's private office, which was numbered 548. It seems the two telephones were so connected that a person listening at the telephone in the hotel office could overhear everything which passed through the telephone in the manager's private office. Now, the books of the telephone company in Columbus show that on January 7 there was but one call from telephone 1092 at the HANNA headquarters to telephone 548, Gibson House, and that was at about 8 p. m. Myers testifies further that Boyce went to the theater after supper on the night of the 7th, returning to the hotel somewhere at about 10:45 p. m. In the meantime another call had come for him from Columbus. He was so notified and went to the telephone in the manager's private office and called up telephone 1092 at Columbus.

Myers said he listened at the telephone in the hotel office and heard all that was said, taking notes of same at the time. He says Boyce addressed the person in Columbus as "Major," told him he had seen "O," had arranged matters, and it would take $20,000 down; that the Major replied: "They did not know about that; they would see 'H.'"

This is getting a little closer than the communication of the Senator from Wisconsin [MR. SPOONER] undertook to attribute to Aguinaldo. That seemed to be very satisfactory proof to the Republicans, and I hope this will be

and that then there was an intermission of about five minutes, when the person at Columbus said they would give $10,000 down and $10,000 when it was over; and that the conversation continued concerning Mr. "O." and what they would pay him for his vote. The books of the telephone company in Cincinnati show that on the 7th of January, 1898, at about 11:20 p. m., Boyce, from telephone 548, called up Columbus and talked with Rathbone eleven minutes

I do not suppose they were talking about the postoffice business in Cuba at this early day

and the telephone books in Columbus show that telephone 548 in Cincinnati called telephone 1092 in Columbus at about 11:15 p. m. on that day.

Myers and two other employees of the Gibson House testify that at about 12 o'clock the same night another call came from telephone

1092

You must remember that "1092" was the telephone in HANNA'S headquarters at Columbus, Ohio

at Columbus for Boyce. Myers claims to have overheard this conversation also, and to have taken notes of it, copies of which were produced in full, and which are as follows:

BOYCE. Hello, Columbus! This you, Major?

MAJOR. (Major) Yes.

BOYCE. What do you want?

MAJOR. Have been talking to H. and he says: "Suppose he won't put signature on paper-what will we do?"

BOYCE. I will fix that all right; but if I was in his place I would not sign paper, as it is a foolish play. His price is $20,000. (Dick is speaking to HANNA).

MAJOR. If he wants protection, exchange notes and accommodation papers with him, as that will protect both of you. He don't want him alarmed.

BOYCE. How will you arrange matters?

MAJOR. I will speak to HANNA

It is not "H" this time, but "I will speak to HANNA"

I will send Hollenbeck down in the morning. He will be there about