Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-03-28

AAANACS
WASHINGTON, d. c., March 81
The argument in the case of Senator
Clark, of Montana, which was to have
been heard by the Senate committee
on elections and privileges tomorrow,
has been postponed until Tuesday of
next week on account of the enforced
absence of some of the members of
the committee.
The briefs on both sides of the case
have been distributed, among members
OF the committee.
The brief of the memorialists COW
ers 142 pages and is signed by ex-Sen-
ator Edmunds, Mr.. Arthur A. Birney
and ex-Congressman Hartman,
The brief of the defense, signed by
Hon. Charles J.. Faulkner and Mr..
Roger Foster, covers 232 pages and is
divided into a discussion of the facts
and the law in the case from Senator
ClarF's standpoint. The document is
throughout an arraignment of the
prosecution. 1t begins with the asser-
ton that IAN examination of this tes-
'iAAohy Will CSuLln Lu6 DlOSL ShSDLlCdl
in the belief that those who seek to
brand a majority of the representa-
tfves of a sovereign State as "dishon-
EST" and as "bribe takers" are infu-
enced by no lofty purpose of remedy
ing an evil, nor is it entered upon from
a desire to maintain the integrity of
the membership of the Senate of the
United States. The facts shown in
this record fully justify the assertion
that those who originated this prose-
cution were controlled only by senti-
ments of the bitterest personal and
political hostility
1t is then declared that no man who
was a candidate fer the Senate in OPP
position to Mr.. Clark has given en-
couragement or countenance to the
contest, that so of the Sc newspapers
in the State supported Mr.. Clark and
that the sentiments in the State of
Montana is universal for Mr.. Clark,
that the leading spirit of the protest
ants, whose wealth has supported and
whose prejudice has animated this
prosecution, has found it necessary to
invest large sums of money in the
purchase of the press of the State, and
in other cases by the establishment Of
newspapers with the hope of checking
and dividing the sentiment of the peo-
pie Of Montana"
Proceeding ON this line counsel as
sert that the testimony has shown
the fight on Senator Clark's right to a
to use the terms purity and honesty
to cover the eleven foot Of personal
malice"
After some other preliminary re-
marks, the brief definitely and specifi-
cally names Mr.. Marcus Daily as the
chief instigator of the contest and the
on this point is as follows:
Marcus Daily having defeated Sena-
tor Clark in 1888 for Congress and for
the Senate in 1893, through treachery
to his party organization, was unwill-
ing to restrain his personal hostility
and to permit the voice of the people
through their legally constituted rep
resentatives to determine the election
of their Senator, and according to his
testimony as early as the 10th of Feb
ruary, 1899, he organized a committee
of his personal friends and agents to
work up and prepare a case against the
seating of Senator Clark by this body.
The testimony will bear out the as
sertion that every member of this
prosecuting committee was either one
of the conspirators in the attempt to
defeat Mr.. Clark's election or a en-
ploye of Mr.. Daily, or an adherent of
his faction in the State.
'In the attempt to fasten some fact
upon Senator Clark or his friends,
tending to show bribery or corruption,
this self-constituted committee has en-
ployed every means which the unlim-
tied use of money could command, in
Guiding the use of detectives in Mon
tana, in Washington and in New York,
with the view of obtaining some cor
roboration Of the testimony of the con-
spirators."
Reviewing the charges made in the
memorial in opposition to Mr.. Clark,
it is claimed that "out of the 81 names
given of members who were bribed,
there is an absolute failure to intro
duce any proof of any character. by
Whiteside or any n else that they
know of an act by which any of
these men were bribed, or have heard
any friends of Senator Clark in any
conversation claim they were bribed."
The contention is then made that
the prosecution of the case is the re-
suit of a conspiracy, former State
Senator Whiteside being represented
as the chief conspirator. Mr.. White
sides statements, it is claimed, can
not be accepted as true, because Of
their improbability when taken in con-