The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-11-06
Of FAR-REACH|NG EFFECT
Welcomes Guilt Will Besmirch
Clark's Title.
THE HEARING AT HELENA
To Determine Whether or Not the At
torney Should Be Dlsbarred-Only
the Guilty Need Fear
Investigation.

The center of interest in Montana
the hearing is to be had before tie SUI
preme court to determine whether or
not John b. Welcome shall be dis
barred from henceforth practcirg as
an attorney in the state of Montana.
The charge has been squareiy made in
the plainest language possible that Nj
Welcome bribed members OF the Mon
tana legislature to vote for w. y
Clark for United States senator. This
makes the pending examination far
reaching in its effects, for if Mr.. Well
come is shown to be guilty and is dis
barred, Mr.. Clark's title is forever be-
smirched.
Time and time again since Fred
Whiteside made his sensational charges
against Clark in the Montana legisa-
ture, Mr.. Clark and his friends have
been given opportunity to deny or to
disprove the charges made. Yet up TO
to-day the accused has merely declined
to answer. When Beasley was before
the court and was asked some search
ing questions relative to certain finan-
cial transactions in St. Paul, he sim
ply refused to give any information, or
to answer the questions. When w. a.
Clark was questioned in a Butte court
relative to certain matters connected
with the senatorial fight being in -.-e
nature of a deposition in the White
side Miner libel suit, he merely de-
clined to answer. Now, without doubt,
there are some people in Montana who
really believe that Mr.. Clark secured
his election by means of bribery. IT
this is not true, Mr.. Clark should be
more anxious than anyone else that his
skirts be cleaned and his innocence
established. He should court the full
est inquiry and be ready to answer any
and all questions pertaining to the sub
ject. When the bankers of Helena were
| asked to show the records of the finan-
cial transactions of members of the
legislature during the session last win
ter they also declined to assist in the
investigation. 1t would seem that, if
there were nothing TO fear, If there
were no shady transactions appearing
on the books, there could be no posi-
BILE objection to the examination of the
books. Only the guilty need fear in
vestigation. When Carr was subpoe-
naed to be examined at Kalispell, he
suddenly disappeared from the state.
The charge has been directly made that
Carr was bribed. Yet when an inves-
tigation was on and he was given an
opportunity to clear himself, he failed
to show up.
The same reticence has heretofore
been noticeable in connection with the
Welcome disbarment case. The pro-
ceedings We're instituted six months
| ago. 1t is indeed a serious charge TO
be hanging over the head of a reputable
attorney. Yet the sole policy of the
respondent has been a policy of delay.
Instead of assisting towards an imme-
diate hearing, so that if innocent he
might be relieved of the charge as early
| as possible, the policy has been to avoid
hearing, If possible: or, at any rate,
to postpone it to as late a date as pos
sible. The supreme court has, however,
declared that the case must be heard
and heard at once. 1t is not believed
that any further delay will be tolerated.