The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-01-25
QUAY AND CLARK.


Messrs. Clark and Quay are both strug-
Cling for seats in the United States SEN
ate. The ordinary observer does not dis
tinguish that there is any particular
analogy between their cases. Yet their
cases are quite near alike. Mr.. Clark &C
oordtng to all the developments of the in
vestigation now in progress, got his seat
-Oy right of purchase. Mr.. Quay gets his
claim to his seat by just the same in
huence.a Mr.. Clark paid down good hard
money, If the testimony Of certain ctti-
zens Of Montana Is true. Mr. Quay paid
his price. too, although it was not in
money Mr.. Clark, we are told, bought
a legislature. The object of Mr.. Quays
purchase was governor. 1t would have
done Mr.. Clark no good to have owned
governor, and Mr., Quay, not being quite
as well fixed in the worlds goods was
not able to buy legislature. A governor
answered his purpose just as a legisla-
ture was the thing for Mr. Clafk's money
1t is not surprising under all the circum-
stances that the belief has gone abroad
that Mr.. Clark and Mr. Quay have Joined
hands They have a common cause. Mr..
Quay's case Is digni1ed by having a con-
stitutional question more or less serious
involved In it. Mr.. Clark's case is one
where mans friends show their readi-
ness to go out and do all sorts of reckless
things. without his knowledge Of course,
in order to install him in g statesmanlike
post.
And now it all resolves itself into a
question of majority Mr.. Quay has it in
his power to make 1t very unpleasant for
his party and his party associates If he
is kept out of his seat. Mr.. Clark has it
in his power to make 1t very pleasant for
Mr.. Quay and Mr.. Quays political friends
If he is able to retain his seat It Is not
question Of Republican and Democrat,
so far as Mr.. Clark and Mr. Quay are
disposed to regard it. But 1t is just that
and nothing more, as the national Repub-
lican administration and probably the Re
publican majority in the senate are dis
posed to regard 1t.
If the senate Of the United States has
any regard for it's good name 1t will ex-
clude both these men. They represent
just the same standard of public morals
What they are able to get in politics
they get by purchase. Office is chiefly
Quay's current coin In his political trans
actions, backed of course by g certain
amount of cash. But cash alone repre-
sents Mr.. Clark's claims. United States
senatorships have long been regarded as
purchaseable commodities. There is only
one conclusion which the majority of the
senate can reach in these cases If 1t de-
sires to put an end to that particular
industry and preserve the respect of the
country. That conclusion is to exclude
both the applicants for seats They can
not seat the one and let the other go
without having set the seal of the ap-
prevail Of the senate on the right of pur-
chase
1t may be all very well to treat the case
of the more dangerous character of the
two as involving q constitutional ques-
tion and to say that the state of Penn
sylvania should not be disfranchised.
That Is just what the legislature Of Penn
sylvania said should be the case rather
than that Quay should have the seat
Other states, like Oregon, have been dis
franchised on the same lines In the past
and no one has thought 1t necessary to
worry over 1t. But 1t is a powerful Re-
publican politician whose OK is being
gored on this occasion, and the GIob G
is much mistaken If 1t is not found that
the constitution will be successfully
worked by Messrs. Mckinley, Hanna and
the rest Of them on this occasion in order
to preserve the Invaluable services OF
Matthew Stanley Quay to the nation.