The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-01-25
THE MErcALFE INCIDENT.

The Metcalfe affalr, one OF the most
striking incidents of the recent senatorial
contest, has been, and still is, a theme of
general discussion and comment by the
press of the state as we'll as among the
public. Not unnaturally, perhaps, but in
the light of the facts very unjustly, Rep
resentative Metcalfe himself is criticised,
while the faults of those whom he accuses
are passed over in silence. 1t is as if he
were at fault in not retaining the bribe
that was given him, as if he had perpe-
trated grave crime against public moral
ity in exposing the nefarious transaction
which had so nearly been consummated.
AS has been said, it is not altogether un-
natural that Representative Metcalfe
should be assailed, while Harry Clarke and
those associated with him should be passed
over in silence Metcalfe's exposure
brought clear-cut and well-defned charge
of corruption dangerously near to a coterie
of powerful politicians. 1t is not strange
that they should seek to destroy the man
who has thus assaIled them-that they
should turn all their batteries upon the
reputation of the man whose vindication
means their own destruction.
In determining whether Representative
Metcalfe should be censured or praised for
his course, it is necessary to consider the
manner of man he is and the motives
which prompted him. He is a clean-cut,
straightforward young man, with frank,
fearless and manly face. AS to his past
ha hot
have charged against him is that in the
past he has assisted in bringing law
breakers to justice. As to the motives
which prompted him, few moments con-
versation with him will convince any I'M
prejudiced person that they were honor
able and philosophical.
Mr.. Metcalfe was not at any time during
the senatorial contest an enthusiastic sup
porter of Senator Squire. 1t was under
stood from the beginning that he would
vote for Squire, but he was not an active
participant in the battle and was not
numbered among the radical supporters of
the Senator. In many respects he was an
onlooker in the early stages of the con-
test. He became convinced, however,
that a shameless use of money
was being made in the inter
est of Judge Calkins, and he
conceived it to be his duty to put stop to
this corruption by exposing it. In order
to do this he took the only course by which
he could accomplish his purpose. He per-
mitted the corruptionists to expose their
methods to him. He accepted their money
in order that he might put quietus upon
that form of public corruption. At the
first opportunity-within few hours of
the time that the money was paid to him
he denounced the act before the legislature
and before the people of the state and sur
rendered the money, which a less honor
able man would have retained.
Such is the Metcalfe incident in outline.
The people of this state who believe in
public morality, who desire to see crime
detected and punished, who prize the fair
fame of their commonwealth, owe il to
themselves 10 rally around this young
man and TO prevent his destruction by the
powerful enemies whom he has aroused
Ifthose who expose corruption are bounded
TO death without a voice being raised in
their defense, how can purity in public
affairs be expected? If the corruptionist
escapes scot free, while the walls of wrath
are emptied upon his accuser, how can
corruption be punished?
Every circumstance leads to the belief
that Representative Metcalfe's motives
were pure and honorable. If this be
granted, he is entitled to the support and
| encouragement of the honorable and law
| abiding people of the state.