Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-03-28
ANSWER Of
CLARK FILED
Continued from Page ~

sition to Mr.. Clark a given encourage
ment or cOuntenance to the contest, that
So of the Sc newspapers in the state sup
ported Mr.. Clark and that the sentiment
in the state of Montana is so universal
for Mr.. Clark that the leading spirit of
the protestants, whose wealth has sup
ported n whose prejudice has animated
the prosecution has found 1t necessary to
invest large sums of money in the pur-
chase of the press of the state and in
other cases by the establishment of news
papers with the hope of checking and di-
viding the sentiment of the people Of
Montana
After some other preliminary remarks,
the brief definitely and specifically names
Mr.. Marcus DAILY as the chief instigatOr
of the contest. The statement on this
point is as follows: Marcus Daily hav-
ing defeating Senator Clark in 1883 for con-
gress and for the senate in 1899, through
treachery to his party organization, was
unwilling to restrain his personal hostil-
ity and to permit the voice of the people
through their. legally constituted repre-
sentatives to determine the election of
their senator. and according to his tes-
timony as early as the 10th of February,
1899, he organized a committee of his per-
sonal friends and agents to work up and
prepare a case against the seating of
Senator Clark by this body.
IN lCollIllOIy Will DGCI OuL liz doSCI-
ton that every member of this prosecu-
ting committee was either one of the con
%spirators in the attempt to defeat Mr..
Clark's election, on an employee of MIR.
DAILY. or an adherent of his faction in the
state.
I'm the attempt to fasten some facts
upon Senator Clark or his friends, tend
ing to show bribery or corruption, this
s~elf-cOnstituted committee has employed
aNyn1.x rnna n which, tho 1tO1iy,nffo6 IF
n could command, including the use
of detectives in Montana. in Washington
and in New York with the view of obtain
ing some confederation of the testimony
of the cOnspiratOrS."
Reviewing the charges made in the
memorial in opposition to Mr.. Clark it is
claimed thai "out of the 81 names given
of members who were bribed there is an
absolute failure to introduce any proof
of any character, by Whiteside or any
one else that they knew of any act by
which 20 of these men We're bribed or
have heard any friends of Senator Clark
in any conversation claim that they We're
bribed."
The contention is hen made that the
prosecution of the case is the result of a
conspiracy, former State Senator White
side being presented as the chief con-
.Spirator. Mr.. Whites.de'ss statements, it is
declared, cannot be accepted, because
of the improbability when taken in con-
nection with uncontradicted facts"
The connection of the prosecution with
the witenss Hill, Wright. Minchell,
Cowan. Ector, Lyon, Jackson, Hewitt.
Cason, Warren, Representative Normoyle
n Representative Murray is reviewed
at length. after which the authors of the
brief remark fortunately for the honor
of this great body, truth and justice, in
the case of the witnesses named has tri-
umphed over fraud, perjury and attempt
al npIi1II.X,. Tho aauolnnnonnt nf tho
methods employed in the cases mentioned
must throw discredit and excite the sus-
piciOn of all fair-minded men as to all
the testimony introduced with a view of
sustaining the theory of this prosecu-
tiOn."
A review is made of the testimony rela-
tive to the following members of the leg
islature: Messrs. Cooney Mckay, Sulli-
van, Long, Hobson, Moore, Black, Con-
nelly. Fine, Beasley, Tierney, Geiger, Nc
Laughlin. Woods, Day. Warner and
Speaker Stiff. and the point made that
there is no evidence tending to show that
they were corruptly influenced.
In the case of Mr.. Mclaughlin, who
solo some timber land to Senate Clark
about the time of the meeting Of the
that there is not a word of testimony in
the record which can be costrued in any
way against Senator Clark or upon which
n criticism can be advanced as to the
conduct of Senator Clark and Mr.. Nc
Laughlin in this transaction"
In the case of Woods, to whom 81. OOO
was rendered by Mr.. Bickford, it is re-
marked: Taking the account of the
transaction in which Mr.. Ecker differs
from Judge Bickford, it stands as a
complete vindication of Woods. Both
admit that the monev ~a. returned to
@tckford and he shows that it was re-
turned to Charles w. Clark. There ia
not a word in the testimony as shown
by this record that would justify any
conclusion that would affect the inter-
rIty and honesty of Representative
Woods ~ 07r
With reference to Mr.. Day. this state
ment is made: "A month after the
election of Senator Clark, i in recognition
of certain of his supporters, sent them
a present in the form Of a check or GER
ed for this recognition of his apprecia-
ton We're John B. Welcome, Vim. NC.
Dermott n E.. c. Day, the SIM to
each being $4,000. Had Mr.. Dav NOT
been a member of thu Legislature. az
welcome and Mr.. McDermott were not
the committee, we suppose would not
have permitted any evidence upon this
SUBJECT to be spread upon the records.
With the plain, straightforward and
consistent statements made by both
senator Clark and Mr.. Daily, we feel
satisfied hat his transaction cannot
even create al unfavorable impression
upon the mind of this committee"
In the case of Senator Warner thew
say: We feel that the testimony Of
Lyons. Nolan n Campbell completely
sustain positions we have taken, that IL
never entered the minds of those man.
gin the prosecution to rely upon this
ordinary business transaction of the
transfer Of property from Warner 10
mares n w: Clark; through his agent.
until they found that they could not
rely upon Lyons to sustain bv his ta.'
tinony the statement that was mann
Iactufed every wore of which ~.
Ons sWears was false. ~
IT should be understood that there
Is no testimony connecting Senator w
action" AoAo-
IN the case OF Speaker Stiff: "a man
VINO could in any state secure the sun