The state herald., 1899-05-19
FORTUNE UNCLAIMED.
Montana "Boodle" for which No ownor
Dares to Appear.

- E0hi StNS ~
Montana "Boodle" for which No Ownor
Dares to Appear.
A fortune Of sac ,on0 In thirty bills
OF the denomination OF $1,000. is in
the hands Of the state treasurer of
Montana, quietly awaiting the arrival
OF a claimant who can prove his title
clear. That is not wealth beyond the
dreams Of avarice," but is greater
fortune than the average citizen can
hope to possess, no matter how hard
he strives. Fifty years ago there were
prosperous states not dozen of whose
citizens owned as much as $30,000
GUS and thrifty farmers and mechanics
who are esteemed well-to-do, whose
sons and daughters are being literally
educated, but whose entire estates are
not worth $4,000. The citizen who, In
the productive period Of his life, can
lay by $500 year is especially favored
OF fortune. 1t would require great
many years with his savings safely in
vested to pile up 100000. And yet
there are those thirty bills. each good
for $1,000 in gold, lying idle in the
custody Of the treasurer Of Montana.
not turned into the public exchequer.
because the state does not own them.
1t not only does not own them, but 1t
has failed in sundry efforts to find out
who Is their lawful proprietor. 1t
knows the man from whose hands the
money came into its possession, but
he says 1t is not his. and he cannot
prove that he got 1t in the way he says
he did. When the long and bitter SEN
atorial fight was on, few weeks ago
a legislator charged that an attempt
had been made to buy his vote and
that OF two other members for 10000
each. This virtuous statement declared
that the attempted bribery was In the
interest Of Clark, the millionaire
candidate, who finally carried of the
prize, and is senator-elect to the Fifty
sixth congress. or course, there was
an investigation, at which the member
produced the $4,000. declaring that he
had taken 1t in order to entrap the
Clark party. One OF the other two
who were to divide the pile confirmed
the statement, but the third gave 1t
total and emphatic denial Then the
grand Jury took hand in the inquiry.
but failed to indict for lack OF evidence.
And there the matter dropped. But
the money was still on hand. Mr..
Clark declared that 1t did not belong
and never had belonged to him. OF
course he could not receive It. His
theory was that his opponent had fur
nished the 10000 to put up "job"
on him. The member who turned In
the wad could not take 1t back with
out virtually confirming Clarks expla-
nation. The salary Of senator for q
full term OF six years is $4,000. The
net savings OF the average senator for
SIX years are not more than 5000.
Supposing this money to have come
from one OF the candidates-and that
is an Inevitable conclusion-what be-
sides corruption is the significance OF
the incident? We have seen 1t pointed
out q hundred times as disgrace to
the country, but 1t Is nothing Of the
kind. 1t is scandalous affair. and
would brand the guilty party with in
fanny, II he could be identified. but 1t
does not touch the honor Of the nation.
1t is, however. tribute to the high
character Of the United States senate.
The wisest and best Of our statesmen
aspire to a seat in that body. as the
goal OF an honorable ambition. But
men whose only influence is cash crave
that honor, and are willing to sacri-
fee fortunes to attain it-Washington
Post,