The evening times., 1900-04-06
CLARK'S COUNSEL SPEAK
MeSsrS. Faulkner and Foster Ad-
dress the Committee.
Powerful Summing Up OF the Case
for the SehRtOr-BItfer Arrafgn-
Evidence Inadequate TO SustaIn
an Indictment for Petty Larceny.

gument for the defence in the Montana
Senatorial enquiry before the Committee
on Privileges and Elections Of the Senate
this morning. In the beginning Mr.. Fos-
ter addressed himself TO the attempt Of
( Corpett Treacy. and NellI to bribe the
Montana Supreme Court as testified 20 by
the Supreme Justices. He said in part:
The failure Of the Montana judges to
Immediately act for the punishment Of the
offence Of Or. Treacy, which was a felony,
was beyond all question an impeachable
offence. even il they should hold that they
themselves were exempt from indictment
fer thus committing what was by the com
mon law misprison Of a felony and is
violation Of the penal code Of that state
rs it TO be wondered that when sum
moned before a tribunal. the members
OF which, by their own confession were
despised by their nUighbors. and had not
sufficient self-respect 10 resent the great
est insult that could have been offered
them, or TO punish the greatest crime that
could be perpctrated, Mr.. Welcome
. thought il would be useless to take the
stand in his own behalf and preferred to
( leave his reputation. in spite Of their de-
cision, TO the people c. liont6na2 He
can afford. like Mr.. Justice Field. who was
once disbarred in California, TO wa.t for
time TO yindicate him. His reputation
VIII be cleared. But how about his triers
80 much for the State Supreme Court.
/ God save the Commonwealth OF Montana"
Continuing. Mr. Foster said
The evidence for the defence was Of
three classes: A denial Of the case FOR the
prosecution, an account OF all moneys eN-
pended not only upon the Senatorial cleo
tion but also upon the previous campaign;
am evidence tending 10 prove that there
was conspiracy by the followers OF Mar
Gus DAILY to prevent Mr. CIarks election
and in case Of failure then 20 uuseat him
upon false charge OF bribery.
Every witness who swore TO anything
material had been cortrsd'cted by the
oaths Of al the perscLs whom he in pill
Gated. II Whiteside's evidence was true
more ihan twelve men had committed per-
jury. ! need not. before gentlemen Of
your experience aud knowledge Of human
nature. tilate upon the difference ia the
cemeanor and appearance CT the witnesses.
You will however. pardon me Tor a single
observation. You have seen and listened
10 Mr. Charles CLARK and MT. Welcome
You know their positions in the world;
their previous cdUcafiOu-One a Yale grad
uate. The other trained by one OF the most
respected lawyers in New Hamps hire. and
the son-in-law o. one Of the most esteemed
clergymen in Montana. Both certainly
must have Impressed you rs men OF IN
usual ability.
Again Addressing himself to Reprsseuta-
tive Campbell OK Montana. Senator eI5rE's
attorney said
Certain izueDdoes had been made BY
the Congressman from Montana 90 the eT-
feet that So was surprising that
Senator Clark's checks had not been
preserved But rheu we consider the
farIFr .r = .--a
transactions and the many thousand
checks a year that are drawn boy him. it is
clear that his custom Of destroying them
every SIX months Is not unnatural. Before
heir destruction. transcripts containing
their amounts and the names Of the payees
are preserved.
'The proof Of a conspiracy offered By
the respondent in addition 10 ;hat fur
nished by the Witnesses -in-Chief. consist
ing OF threats made by DAILY WhiJeside.
and TOOle before the Legislature met and
the subornation Of witnesses. shall not
take up your time by elaborate comments
upon the testimony concerning those
threats, which YOU remember Senators.
The subornstiOn OF perjury was proved di-
rectly by the testimony Of Lyon Wright
and Hill which was corroborated in nearly
all Of its details by admissions OF Nolan
and Campbell. They were contradjcted by
II
only as TO a few passages in the conver-
sstious that were admitted. The truth Of
their testmOny .C> also proved by the
failure to call the witnesses who were
subOrned when propositions were made 20
them.
"CampbelIs testimony was also full OF
Inconsistencies. and il contained confes-
sioLs Of crime sufficient 20 make him liable
TO Imprisonment FOR fifteen years and six
months"
Former Senator Faulkner. counsel-in-
chief for Senator Clark. began his argu-
ment at 11:IO He congratulated the COM
mittSe and himself on the fact that the
great bribery enquiry is drawing to a
close. lie compiimented the members OF
the committee on the faiJhfulness Of their
attention. He was confident that when
the members came TO write their report
they would let their pens De largely guided
by their opinion Of the witnesses who
have appeared in the case. He would not
seek to belittle the gravity OF the charge
against Senator Clark, affecting his stand
ing as an officer OF this Republic and as a
citizen. Mr. Faulkner reviewed the per
sonaI history Of the defendant. He refer
red to his great wealth. but said he was
proud 20 know that he did not spend his
time in cutting coupons. He was a pro-
ducer and was one Of the great factors in
upbuiiding the greatest of nations.
Senator Clark had put forth all his en-
ergy in resisting the combined assault OF
wealth and perjury which had been made
upon him. not, thank God. by the people
Of Montana but the hired agents. the
tools. and the puppets Of one man-Mar-
Gus DAILY. Mr.. Faulkner maintained that
the people OF the State Of Montana did
not sympathize with the investigation and
had no confidence in the integrity of the
agents of Marcus DAILY who are pressing
the charges against Senator Clark
The counsel maintained that the memo
rialists had come before the Senate COM
mittee 10 press their charges because they
feared to present their case to a Jury Of
the vicinity in which the alleged offence
was said TO have been committed. He
called attention to the prophecy made by
him at the opening Of the case that when
the case had closed the members Of the
committee would find themselves in the
position Of arbitrators between the malice
and the vindictiveness Of Marcus Daily and
the right and title Of Senator Clark to the
seat to which he was elected.
Going into the matter OF the alleged at
tempt at the bribery Of the Supreme Court
of Montana. Mr.. Faulkner challenged the
prosecution to point TO one scintilla OF ev
idence which connected DR.. Treacy with
Senator Clark. He severely criticised the
Justices Of the Supreme Court-Pigott
Hunt and Brantley
Referring to Marc,is DAILY Mr. Faulkner
said: when that man deliberately swore
as he did before this committee that ne
had no unkindly feelings toward Senator
Clark and his family. it stamped every
other statement he made on this stand as
unworthy of belief Mr. Faulkner said
that the bitterness Of Daily toward Clark