718 



PENNSYLVANIA. 



tection and indemnity when assailed by lawless 

 violence; also, that common sagacity would 

 suggest that the State, instead of sturdily re- 

 fusing indemnity, should be ready and willing 

 to afford the amplest protection and indemnity 

 to corporations which pay into her Treasury 

 the largest part of the revenues for the sup- 

 port of her government, her charitable insti- 

 tutions, and her schools. The railroad com- 

 pany which is the principal loser in the Pitts- 

 burgh riots pays into the State Treasury little 

 less than a million dollars a year. Under the 

 present system of taxation, with the receipts of 

 the company increasing, the amount will soon 

 be considerably over a million. It seems, there- 

 fore, that obligations and duties should be recip- 

 rocal. When a State levies this amount of reve- 

 nue from a corporation, it should receive in- 

 demnity when its property is destroyed through 

 the failure, or neglect, or inability of the au- 

 thorities of the State to give protection. The 

 obligations should not be all on one side. 



A motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was 

 carried by a vote of 103 to 96. The ques- 

 tion on the motion to reconsider this vote 

 was tirst temporarily and then decisively post- 

 poned. 



Meantime, during the debate on the bill, one 

 of the members of the House asserted posi- 

 tively that " at least two members of the House 

 of Representatives had been approached in a 

 corrupt! ve manner and had been subjected to 

 corruptive powers." This led to the adoption 

 of a resolution for the appointment of a com- 

 mittee to investigate the charges, "and any 

 other improper influences brought to bear upon 

 members in connection with the bill." One 

 of the first witnesses examined by the investi- 

 gating committee was Mr. W. H. Kemble ot 

 Philadelphia. He stated his occupation to be 

 " president of a bank and of a railroad com- 

 pany." The following is an extract from a re- 

 port of the investigation, and contains a defi- 

 nition of legislative log-rolling : 



Q. Have you, directly or indirectly, offered any 

 money or thing of value, testimonial, privilege, or per- 

 sonal advantage to any member of the General Assem- 

 bly to influence him in his official action on House bill 

 No. 103, commonly known as the riot bill ? A. No, 

 sir ; unless you interpret the common aid that one man 

 gives to another in legislation as " personal advan- 

 tage." 



Q. Will you please state what you mean by the 

 common aid which one man gives to another? A. I 

 mean this, that if you mean to ask me whether I ever 

 promised to help A in legislation in return for A help- 

 ing me in legislation, without any money considera- 

 tion or thing of value, I can't say that I never have ; 

 but if it is a money consideration or anything of the 

 kind which the world regards as bribery, I say no. I 

 mean by that this : that I have never offered any man 

 a bribe, directly or indirectly ; but the language of the 

 Constitution goes far beyond what any man that ever 

 came to Harrisburg ever lived up to or ever will live up 

 to. I was a friend of the bill, and did all I could for 

 it in an honorable way. 



To the next question, as to whether he had personal 

 knowledge of any member having solicited any money, 

 etc., with a view to his official action being influenced 

 thereby, Mr. Kemble said, " No, always excepting the 



. 



define " log-rolling," he said : " It is what 1 regard as 

 higher than all constitutions, that one good turn de- 

 serves another ; that is all there is of it in passing bills, 

 which, if a man don't do, he may as well stay away 

 from Harrisburg, and yet the strict interpretation of 

 the Constitution prohibits it." 



To the question, also, as to personal knowledge of 

 any member having demanded 01 received, or con- 

 sented to receive, etc., ho answered : " None whatever, 

 except common log-rolling. I tried to log-roll with 

 everybody, so far as that is concerned. I don't deny 

 that." 



The report of the committee was made on 

 May 29th. After reciting the resolution di- 

 recting the investigation, the committee state 

 that the rules which guided them in their con- 

 clusions as far as practicable were the same as 

 those which govern the courts. Irrelevant 

 testimony was submitted, but it did no harm 

 to any one. Conflicting testimony was also 

 taken, but they were guided by the reasonable 

 and consistent circumstances. No attempt was 

 made to impeach any witness. In making up 

 the report the committee endeavored to rid 

 their minds of prejudice and passion. They 

 report W. F. Rumberger of Armstrong County, 

 E. J. Petroff of Philadelphia Fifth District, and 

 George F. Smith of Philadelphia Twenty-fifth 

 District, guilty of a violation of section 30, 

 Article III., of the State Constitution, and of 

 the act of Assembly of 1874 defining corrupt 

 solicitations of members, etc. William H. 

 Kemble, ex-member Charles B. Salter of Phil- 

 adelphia, Jesse R. Crawford of Blair, A. W. 

 Leisenring of Carbon, and Christian Long of 

 Cumberland are found guilty of the same. 

 The committee say there is a considerable mass 

 of evidence showing attempts at improper 

 combinations upon other legislation pending 

 before the House or to be brought before it, in 

 order to further the passage of the riot bill. 

 While these combinations or attempted com- 

 binations may not have been such as would 

 render the parties concerned therein criminal- 

 ly liable, yet they have been of such a charac- 

 ter as to be antagonistic to pure and wise le- 

 gislation, to the spirit if not the letter of the 

 Constitution, and to the best interests of the 

 Commonwealth. They find that the public 

 press was not subsidized, but that attempts 

 were made to influence public opinion through 

 the insertion of paid articles in the papers. 



Without waiting to accept the report of the 

 committee, separate resolutions were offered 

 in the House to expel each of the members 

 against whom charges were made in the re- 

 port. Each resolution failed to pass by the 

 constitutional majority of two thirds. The 

 votes for expulsion were as follows : on Petroff 

 yeas 98, nays 88 ; on Smith yeas 88, nays 

 79; on Rumberger yeas 104, nays 69. A 

 resolution was also adopted to appoint a com- 

 mittee on the part of the House to commence 

 criminal proceedings against William H. Kem- 

 ble, Charles B. Salter of Philadelphia, Isaac R. 



