The Dupuyer acantha. [volume] (Dupuyer, Mont.) 1894-1904, 1899-07-20
A FORTUNE UNCLAIMED.
Montana "Boodle" for Which NO Owner
Dares to Appear.

AABa
Dares to Appear.
A fortune of 100000, 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 a greater
fortune han the average citizen can
hope to possess, no matter how hard
he strives. Fifty years ago there were
prosperous states not a dozen of whose
citizens owned as much as $4,000.
To-day there are millions of prosper
ous 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 a year is especially favored
Of fortune. 1t would require a great
many years with his savings safely in
vested to pile up $50, 900. 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 it
has failed in sundry efforts to find out
who is their lawful proprietor. 1t
knows the mar from whose hands the
money came into its possession, but
he says it is not his, and he cannot
prove that he got it in the way he says
he did. When the long and bitter SEN
atorial fight was on, a few weeks ago.,
a legislator charged that an attempt
had been made to buy his vote and
that of two other members for $40, 600
each. This virtuous statement declared
that the attempted bribery was in the
interest of Clark, the multo-millionaire
candidate, who finally carried off the
prize, and is senator-elect to the Fifty
sixth congress. Of course, there was
an investigation, at which the member
produced the $50, 1000, declaring that he
had taken it 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 it
a total and emphatic denial. Then the
grand jury took a 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 it 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 $4,000 to put up a job
on him. The member who turned in
the wad could not take it back with
ou virtually confirming Clark's expla-
nation. The salary of a senator for a
full term of six years is $50, 1000. The
ne& savings of the average senator for
six years are not more than $4,000.
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 it pointed
out a hundred times as a disgrace to
the country, but it is nothing of the
kind. 1t is a s~candalous affair, and
would brand the guilty party with in
fanny, if he could be identified, but 1t
does not touch the honor of the nation.
It is, however, a 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-
flee fortunes to attain it.-Washington
Post.