The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-03-28

Montana, which was TO have bee
heard by the senate committee on priv
ileges and elections tomorrow has bee
postponed until Tuesday cot next weel
on account of the enforced absence o
some of the members of the committee
The briefs on both sides of the cas-
have been distributed among member
of the committee.
The brief of the memorialists coven
142 pages and is signed by eX-SenatO
Edmunds. Mr.. Arthur a. Birnsy an
ex-COngressman Hartman.
After reviewing the testimony in de
established facts in the case OF evi
dence adduced:
First-That at least fifteen member
of the legislature were paid by MI
Clark and his agents for their votes.
Second-That at least nine other
We're offered money for their votes, an
that the total amount Of offers prove,
aggregate $175,000
Third-That 100000 was offered b.
DR.. Treacy, a friend and agent of Nj
Clark. TO bride the attorney general L
dismiss the proceedings in the WellcOm
case. -
Fourth-That the same agent of MI
Clark offered Justice Hunt of the su
preme court $780, 900 10 dismiss tn
Welcome case.
Fifth-That Mr.. Clark and his friend
engaged in wholesale bribery and at
tempted bribery of members of the leg
islature to secure the election OF MI
Clark.
Much is made of the testimony alleg
ing efforts to bride Justice Hunt an,
Attorney Nolan in the Welcome dis
barmeDt case.
Supreme Court Affair.
ct is evident" they say, "that Nj
Clark and his friends fully realized tn
Importance of the decision of that cOur
in its bearing upon Mr.. Clark's contest
otherwise they would not have taken
special train TO bring his agents to He
lena to negotiate and arrange for tn
purchase of that court. The fact tina
Mr.. Clark's agent, Mr.. Jesse B. Roote
the law partner of Mr.. John B. Well
come. paid Mr.. 2. 7. Cason $500 L
leave the state Of Montana and not ties
tify before this committee. is anOthe
circumstance going To bear out tn
charge Of the unlawful expenditure an
corrupt use Of money by Ar. Clark an
his agents to carry out their purposes
The offer OF 500. 600 TO bride the at
tOrney. general to move the dismissal o
the proceedings is but another chapte
of the long story of bribery and at
tempted bribery that marks the entir
history of Mr.. Clark's campaign for tn
senatorship from the time. in August
1898, when he agreed with GOvernO
Hauser and others TO put up $4,000 70
the primaries and from $4,000 to $50, 90
rssal oil -
much afterward as was necessary, u
Cason."
Were offered Money.
Of the ninety-fiye members Of the leg
islature. Including Mr.. Whiteside
twenty-SiX were sworn before thi
committee. OF these the memoTialisU
say nine have taken oath that the.
were offered money TO vote for Senate
Clark. viz: Senators Whiteside, Clark
Meyers and Mckay. and Representa-
tives Stiff, Sullivan. Cooney, Normoyl
and Murphy. TWO-Messrs. Day an,
Fine-they claim, have admitted tn
receipt Of money, $1,000 each, after vot
ing for Clark, but tried to excuse ii
Either by direct testimony or Otherwis
they claim that the acceptance 0
brides is fixed upon fifteen others
From the proof adduced il is reason
ably determinable. they say, that il
addition 10 the S32S, 900 actually paid Z
&C the legislature by Mr.. Clarl
and his agents. offers We're made {
other members, aggregating $4,000.
Memorialists then go into details re
garding the persons alleged TO have re
ceived money from Mr.. Clark and tn
amounts. In their summary the mem
oriaiists refer to the testimony of c. NJ
Jackson of Salt Lake, who asserted o.
the witness stand that Mr.. Clark h3
admitted that he used money TO secur
his election.
Where The Money Went.
Those to whom money was actual
paid, they claim, were: To Representa-
tive Day, $500; to Representative Fine
$1,000; to William McDermott, 81, 600; [
John 3. Welcome, s., 600; to Senator I
G. Warner, 81 500: TO Senator McLaugh
lin, SIC. 500; to Senator Whiteside, s., coo
TO Senator Myers, $4,000; 10 Senate
Clark of Madison, So, 200; total, S207. 3gi
Direct and circumstantiai testimOn
establishes the further payment, the
say, Of $685. 600, as follows: To Repre-
sentative II. H. Carr, $1,000; TO Repre-
sentative Tierney, $4,000; to Represen
tative Bywater, SIS, 600; to Representa-
tive Jacqueth, $4,000; TO Representa-
tive Woods. $1,000; 10 Representativ
Shovlin, 50, 500; to Representative HaT
ker, 81, GOO; TO Representative Beasell
s., 600; 10 Representative Eversol,
$1,000; to Senator HObsOn, $25,000; [
Senator Gieger, $1,000.
In conclusion the nemOrialists say
1--WE submit that the evidence taken a
a whole establishes corruption in thi
election of a senator unparalleled i
recorded precedents and conduct which
If justified. would bring shame and dis
grace upon the Institutions Of our coun
try"
Brief of the Defense.
The brief of the defense, signed b
the Hon Charles J. Faulkner and Nj
Roger Foster, covers g32t pages and j
divided into a discussion Of the fact
and the law in the case from Senate
Clark's standpoint. The document j
throughout an arraignment Of the pros
ecution. tt begins with the assertio
that IAN examination of this testimon
viii confirm the most skeptical in tn
belief. that those who seek to brand
majority Of the representative Of
sovereign state as dishonest" and z
"bribetakers' are influenced by no loft
purpose of remedyifg an evil, nor is
entered upon from q desire to maintai
the integrity OF the membership Of tn
senate Of the United States. The fact
shown in this record fully justify tn
assertion that those who originate
this prosecution were controlled onl
by sentiments Of the bitterest persona
and political hostility"
Newspapers Supported Clark.
Tt is then declared that no man VII
was a candidate for the senate in OF