New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-02-21
MISPLACED CONFIDENCE.

Mr. Horace r. Clark appears In our columns this
morning in letter of very considerable length,
which purports to repel the averments Of Messrs.
Porter G. Sherman, james P. Pagan and others,
that be assured them personally, at two different
interviews, that he would, if chosen, support the
Republican candidate for Speaker Of the House.
We trust that letter will be carefully read. And,
as Mr.. Clark insists on making US aparty to bis
controversy, we will endeayOr TO make the whole
matter rs plain as possible.
/. Mr.. Clark was the candidate Of the Buchanan
Democracy for Congress in 1856, and was elected
by large majority over his Republican and Amerl-
can competitors receiving few more votes than
both of them.
III. Mr.. Clark opposed the Lecompton bin and its
aduncts throughout, and thereby lost the favor OF
the greater number of bis Democratic constituents,
and was refused denomination by the regular Con-
vention of bis party.
III. Mr. Clark was nominated by an irregular
Democratic Convention mainly composed of Anti
Lecomptonites, and took the field against the regu
lar Democratic candidate. The Republicans nom-
mated Mr.. James Fairman. The Americans pre-
scented Mr.. Erastus Brooks. In the progress of the
canvass, Messrs. Farman and Brooks severally
withdrew in favor Of Mr.. Clark, on whom the en-
tire Anti-Lecompton vote of the District was con-
centIated.
w. Mr.. Clark was thus elected, receiving $685.
votes to 6,338 for Herrick (LecOmpton Dem.). The
District gave for Governor--Morgan (Repub.) },
5495; Parker (Dem.), 1854; Burrows (Am.),
1898. Mapifestly, a large majority Of Mr.. Clark's
votes.were cast by Republicans.
V. Mr.. Porter G. Sherman for himself and
Messrs. James P. Pagan and William A. Dooley-
all personally known TO us as intelligent and trath-
full men-with Mr.. Geo. w. Barrett, whom we do
not ally know-publicly assert that they
called upon Mr.. Clark, during the progress OF the
canvass, ard asked him whether he would, If
elected, vote with the Republicans in organizing
TIE House; to which he replied in the affirmative;
Mr.. Clark replies that he has no recollection of any
such coloquy and proceeds to tell long, round
about story, which reminds US strongly OF Fastaf's
noted reply to the inculpatons Of Mrs. Quickly.
We do not contrOyert Mr.. ClaIk's assertions; but
we mpeach the accuracy of his recollection. He
has thousand hurried interviews with Tom Dick,
and Harry, during that excited canvass jumbled
together in his mind and the fact that he has no
distinct recollection of these particular interviews
is not remarkable. How can that fact overbear the
clear recolectons and precise averments of Messrs
Sherman, Pagan and Dooley, who called on him
but once each, and who had precise and definite
obiect-namely to ascertain whether it was advis-
able for them, as Republicans, to support Mr..
Clark-what was to be gained for the Republican
cause by so doing
VI. And now, let us look at the Gaze more
broadly Mr.. Clark, discarded for cause by the
party which had previously elected him, was sup
ported for reelection by the Republicans of his
District and received most Of his votes from them.
Suppose he had never made direct promise to any
of them-what were the circumstances OF his re-
turn? What did those circumstances fairly entitle
this majority of his supporters to expect at his
hands, Admit that il would have been right for
him to support for Speaker man Of precisely his
own stripe, could such have been elected, was it
fair and just for him, with two or three like
him, to block the organization of the House
fer two whole months rather than let
Republican be chosen Speaker Was this the enter
tainment to which the majority Of his supporters
were invited Suppose they had been as fastidi-
GUS in the choice of Representative as he was
with regard to the choice of Speaker where
would he have been to-day! Remember that he
proclaimed, in former letter, that he could not
vote for Sherman because Of the Helper book, &c.
Yet he voted as steadily against Mr.. Pennington
who could not be objected to on that ground, and
who was elected, in the adjoining district of New
Jersey, by substantially like combination to that
which chose Mr. Clark in the upper district of this
City. l. does certainly seem to us that Mr.. Clark
has involved himself in u very tangled and uncom-
Portable predicament, and that he is not likely to
get out of it by letter. writing.