(Table 6-11)

Timothy Pickering (F-Massachusetts)
January 2, 1811 (20-7)

--for reading confidential documents in open Senate session before an injunction of secrecy was removed. Failed reelection (elected to the House in 1812).

Benjamin Tappan (D-Ohio)
May 10, 1844 (38-7)

--for releasing to the New York Evening Post a copy of President John Tyler s message to the Senate of April 22, 1844 regarding the treaty of annexation between the United States and the Republic of Texas. Did not run for reelection.

Benjamin R. Tillman (D-South Carolina)
John L. Mc Laurin (D-South Carolina)
February 28, 1902 (54-12; 22 not voting)

--for fighting in the Senate chamber on February 22, 1902. Each was censured and suspended, retroactively, for six days. This incident led to the adoption of Rule XIX governing the conduct of debate in the chamber. Tillman reelected; McLaurin did not run for reelection.

Hiram Bingham (R-Connecticut)
November 4, 1929 (54-22; 18 not voting)

--for employing as a Senate staff member Charles Eyanson, who was simultaneously employed by the Manufacturers Association of Connecticut. Eyanson was hired to assist Bingham on tariff legislation. The issue broadened into the question of the government employing dollar-a-year-men. Condemned for conduct tending to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute. Defeated for reelection.

Joseph R. Mc Carthy (R-Wisconsin)
December 2, 1954 (67-22)

--for his abuse and non-cooperation with the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections during a 1952 investigation of his conduct; for abuse of the Select Committee to Study Censure. He was condemned not censured. Died in office.

Thomas J. Dodd (D-Connecticut)
June 23, 1967 (92-5)

--for use of his office (1961-1965) to convert campaign funds to his personal benefit. Conduct unbecoming a senator. Defeated for reelection.

Herman E. Talmadge (D-Georgia)
October 11, 1979 (81-15)

--for improper financial conduct (1973-1978), accepting reimbursements of $43,435.83 for official expenses not incurred, and improper reporting of campaign receipts and expenditures, his conduct was denounced as reprehensible and tending to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute. Defeated for reelection.

David F. Durenberger (R-Minnesota)
July 25, 1990 (96-0)

--for unethical conduct in connection with his arrangement with Piranha Press, his failure to report receipt of travel expenses in connection with his Piranha Press and Boston area appearances, his structuring of real estate transactions and receipt of Senate reimbursements in connection with his stays in his Minneapolis condominium, his pattern of prohibited communications respecting the condominium, his repeated acceptance of prohibited gifts of limousine service for personal purposes, and the conversion of a campaign contribution to his personal use. Denounced for reprehensible conduct, bringing the Senate into dishonor and disrepute.

Source: U.S., Congress, Senate, Senate Election, Expulsion, and Censure Cases from 1793 to 1972, S. Doc. 92-7, 92d Cong., 1st sess., 1972.

Senate Historical Office - March 1992

(Table 6-10)

Senate Expulsion Cases

Article I, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that Each House (of Congress) may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.

Since 1789, the Senate has expelled only fifteen of its entire membership. Of that number, fourteen were charged with support of the Confederacy during the Civil War. In several other cases, the Senate considered expulsion proceedings but either found the member not guilty or failed to act before the member left office. In those cases, corruption was the primary cause of complaint.

In the entire course of the Senate s history, only four members have been convicted of crimes. They were: Joseph R. Burton (1905), John Hipple Mitchell (1905), Truman H. Newberry (1920), and Harrison Williams (1981). Newberry s conviction was later overturned. Mitchell died; and Burton, Newberry, and Williams resigned before the Senate could act on their expulsion.