The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-01-06
Mr.. QUAY TO BE BARRED
COMMITTEE on ELECTIONS DECIDES
AGAINST THE SENATOR.
1t VIII Make an Adverse Report ON
Resolution to Seat the Pennsylva-
nian-The Clark Case.

decided by a vote of to to make an
adverse report on the resolution to seat
Senator Quay. The resolution follows:
Resolved That Matthews S. Quay be
admitted as a senator from the State of
Pennsylvania in accordance with his APP
pointment made on April %, 1883, by the
Governor of said State.
The members of the committee voting for
the resolution were: Senator'S Chandler,
Hoar and McComas, and those opposing
Senators Burrows, Caffrey, Pettis and
Harris. Senators Turley and Pritch-
ard were paired. the latter for and
the former against the resolution. No def
mite time was set for the presentation
of the committees report to the Senate.
The minority will also present a report
and the understanding is that the minority
shall be notified by the majority when it
is ready to put in its report Senator Bur-
rows, the only Republican on the COM
mittee who voted against the resolution.
will prepare the report of the majority and
Senator Hoar that of the minority.
The committee to-day began it's investi-
cation of the charges of bribery made in
connection with the election of Senator
Clark, of Montana. The proceedings were
begun by arguments from counsel on both
sides Mr. Clark himself present with
his counsel. former Senator Faulkner Elk
Senator Edmunds appeared as leading
counsel for the compliments, making the
first statement in support of the men,
orial presented against Mr.. Clark. He said
the complainants expected to be able to
prove all the charges made and to show
that Mr.. Clark's election obtained by
ha IF md lar
of money furnished to this end by
Mr.. Clark He believed the expenditures
could be traced to Mr.. Clark, with due eff
fort on the part of the committee. He said
he and his associates would ask to have
good many witnesses summoned. Mr.. Ed
munds also said the compliments ex-
pected to prove all the charges made, and
in doing so. would enter quite thoroughly
into the Whiteside libel cases, showing
that when Senator Clark had an oppor-
tunity to appear in court he had refused
to answer any material questions
While Mr.. Edmunds was making his
statement question arose concerning the
admissibility of testimony taken by the
grand jury of Lewis and Clark counties,
in which connection Senator McComas took
occasion to intimate that he would hest
tate to admit statements purporting to
violate the secrecy Of grand jury room
Replying Mr.. Edmunds said that the notes
on the grand jury proceedings had been
made by Attorney General Nolan and had
been presented and received by the Mon
tana court in the disbarment proceedings
against John S. Welcome.
Mr.. Hoar suggested that the testimony
should be admitted fer the time and its
relevancy determined upon the final de-
cision of the case. This brought out a
spirited protest by Mr.. Rogers Foster, of
New York, who appeared as one of the
counsel for Mr.. Clark. He urged that such
a course was contrary to the precedents
Of the committee; that Mr. Nolan was per-
sonally antagonistic TO Mr.. Clarke, and
that at best the testimony was ex parte.
Such document was no more evidence
than an indictment would be. Mr.. Clark
was not to be expected to defend his char
acter, but his right to a seat in the SEN
ate. Referring to the Montana Supreme
Court, he said there was politics there as
well as elsewhere in the State. He in
sisted that Mr.. Clarke should have a right
to face and cross-examine all witnesses.
Ex-senator Faulkner made me formal
| statement Oh DendlI Oh Sldrh. lie
viewed the politics of Montana, referring
to the "Daly gang and the Clark factions
in the Democratic politics of the State. 1t
was, he said, acknowledged fact that
the opponents of Mr.. Clark in the State
had determined to prevent his political pre-
ferment regardless of all proprieties. 1t
would be shown that notwithstanding that
charges were made of bribery, against
some fifty persons, including thirty-eight
members of the Legislature, there had been
no proceedings against any of the men thus
involved in any of the Montana courts.
This was evidence that the present pro-
ceeding was not sustained by public SEN
timent. He said: 1.-The prosecution was con-
ceived in the womb of personal malice,
rocked in the cradle Of personal hate and
nourished upon corruption and jealousy"
All the members Of the legislative COM
mittee were opposed to Mr.. Clark.
Outlining the defense, Mr.. Faulkner said
it would show that the proceedings against
Mr.. Clark had really had their origin in
the senatorial contest of 1893, when the
idea of springing a pretended exposure of
Mr.. Clark on the Legislature was con-
ceived by the DAILY faction. and that the
leader of the faction had turned prophet
in December, 1898, and declared that "If
Clark had showed his head something
would be heard to drop and that he would
drive Clark out of the State Other
points of the defense were outlined and
the statement was made that if necessary
each charge against the senator will be met
by direct and positive proof of its falsity.
After hearing these preliminary statements
he boil
to decide on the status of the papers be-
fore it, but after considerable discussion
of the points adjourned without action.
The hearing Of testimony will begin to-
morrow.
PORTO RICANS ASK RELIEF.