ONE CHARGE TOO MANY

The signals being sent to Bob Packwood are subtle, as befits the Senate, but they have begun to carry a powerful message. At the G.O.P.'s weekly Senators-only lunches, some Republicans now avoid sitting near him. When Packwood's colleagues gather for votes on the Senate floor, they hardly ever include him in their convivial chatter. Rarer still is the consoling sidelong murmur he used to hear so frequently: "How's it going, Bob?" The message is evident to everyone, it seems, but the Senator himself, who believes collegial sympathy may be his salvation. "A number of them are praying for me," he says. "And I am convinced that the prayers of others work." But what of the damnation of others? While Republicans still cling to anonymity, their outrage is voluble. Says a fellow G.O.P. Senator: "We've had a gutful of Bob Packwood. It will be a disgrace if the Republican Conference doesn't remove him as chairman of the Finance Committee."

The Senate ethics investigation of alleged sexual misbehavior by the Senator from Oregon has gone on for 32 months, far longer than anyone expected. For much of that time, many Senators seemed willing to write off the accusations against Packwood as harmless ardor on his part or inept passes that were permissible under unstated standards by the Senate of a bygone era. Now suddenly the mood has changed. Though the Ethics Committee's recommendations are at least a month away, there is growing consensus that the penalty will be and must be harsh. The charge that tipped the balance was that of the 19th accuser, which came to light last week. The woman was only 17 years old and a former intern in his Washington office when the alleged incident occurred. Knowing her parents were away, Packwood showed up at her home on the pretext of delivering a letter of recommendation for her college application. As she has recalled, he then "laid a juicy kiss on my lips. I could feel the tongue coming."

That charge, detailed last week in the Salem Statesman Journal and the Portland Oregonian, is actually an old one, dating from 1983. The Washington Post printed her account of the episode in February 1993. However, the woman, now 29, did not take it to the Ethics Committee until July 19--partly because she wanted to protect her privacy and partly because she was skeptical about whether the panel would give it a fair hearing, explained her lawyer W. Neil Eggleston. Even then her complaint languished with the staff for weeks, until Aug. 3, the day after the Senate's 52-to-48 vote against holding public hearings on Packwood. Last week Ethics Committee chairman Mitch McConnell refused to elaborate on how the oversight occurred.

Now California Democrat Barbara Boxer has renewed her crusade to force those hearings. "The apparent abuse of public trust that seems to have taken place against many women is outrageous enough," she said last week. "The fact that it may include a child who was 15 when she started interning for Senator Packwood adds a whole new dimension to this matter." Boxer claims that at least two Senators have told her they are reconsidering their votes against her proposal for hearings. All Boxer needs is one more vote. She picked up an unlikely ally in conservative G.O.P. presidential contender Pat Buchanan, who said if the charges prove to be true, Packwood should resign or be ousted from the Senate.