Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-12-23

into the charges made before the COM
mlttee Their statements made on both
occasions We're in the hands of counsel
at the hearing. And though both were
thoroughly cross-eXamined by able and
astute questioners and every opportun-
ity was afforded to test their truthfulness
by comparison of these statements no
substantial discrepancies We're shown. A
careful and painstaking examination of
their accounts given at the hearing in
so far as they relate to the same matters,
also failed to reveal any substantial con-
tradiction or omission. These statements
are not unreasonable in the light of this
whole record and it is highly improbable
that such story could be deliberately
concocted and repeated SO many times
without being discredited in some SUBJ
stantial particular.
After seeing and hearing the witnesses
ourselves, and noting the silence of the
accused when he ought to speak. and his
failure to produce other witnesses to re-
but the material statements made by
Clark and Whiteside which it was in his
power to do, we can reach no other rea-
sonable conclusion than that this charge
is true.
Counsel for the accused al the OPEN
ing of their proof proposed to show that
for many years there had been scheme
in the democratic party in this state: that
one division was favorable to w. A.
Clark of Butte, and the other followed
the leadership of one Marcus Daily and
was known as the .'Daly Gang; that the
effort Of the latter has always been to
rule the party at all hazards: that one
of it's purposes was to defeat w. A Clark
by fair or foul means in his aspirations
to go to the senate of the United States;
that the witnesses Whiteside and Clark
belong to his gang" that the exposure
was the result of criminal conspiracy
among various members of this gang
including Clark, Whitesde and Myers,
falsely to charge W.A.Clark of Butte and
his friend With bribery and thus to de-
feat him and that the money turned over
by Whiteside was really furnished by
that faction to give the color of truth to
| the charges made against Welcome.
evidence was introduced by the ac-
cused in support of this defense But
taking this all together and giving it the
utmost weight to which it is entitled it is
hardly sufficient TO require consideration,
| as it establishes nothing beyond the fact
| tIdl there Is ana mas Deeu IOE some years
a strong political hostility between w.
A. Clark of Butte. and Daily as rivals for
leadership in the democratic party. There
is no fact proved from which an infer
ence is permissible upon any legal prin-
ciple that the opposition from the Daily
faction of the party was other than such
as was perfectly lawful.
ut was certainly no crime for any NUM-
ber of men TO combine together to elect
w. A. Clark of Butte, by lawful means
to the United States senate 1t was GER
tainly equally lawful for any number of
men to join forces to defeat him, If
they used lawful means only. It does
not appear in this record that the op-
ponents of Clark used any unlawful
means in their opposition to him nor is
there scintilla of proof tending to show
that any of them furnished the money in
evidence in this case
"It appears from the proof that the ac-
cused has heretofore borne an excellent
reputation for honesty and integrity in
his profession. This fact we have con-
sidered in his favor but a spo;less repu-
tation is no defense for crime where
the proof establishes it as fact. So in
this proceeding being satisfied he is gull
ty Notwithstanding his previous good
character We mast SO find. People VS..
Beets, Sc Pac. Rep. 1091.)
Finally counsel insist that men who
deliberately deceive another in order to-
win his confidence with purpose to be-
tray him are not worthy OF belief and;
| that an attorney, heretofore above re-
proach should not be degraded from his