The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-02-17

people who We're not Democrats. The
object was to SO organize as to break
down the ''one man power" in the state.
After aScertaining these facts the SEN
ator said that he had very reluctantly
agreed to the proposition Of his friends
and to assist financially furnishing
such funds as were absolutely neceS-
Sary in a prudent way to accomplish
the object aimed at.
Senator Clark said he had at the pre-
Iminary meeting with his friends IN
Helena agreed to enter the campaign
to Wrest the power from DAILY but not
with the understanding that he would
be a senatorial candidate. That con-
elusion had come later. He said that
all told he had spent about $115,0OO in
the campaign. There were four differ
ent contributions, a preliminary one OF
$35, GOO; then $50, 900. then $4,000 and then
$40, ,000. He denied explicitly all the
statements made by Whiteside, Mark
Hewitt and others connecting him with
corrupt methods in securing his cleo
ton to the senate, saying that so far as
he knew no money had been used COR
ruptly in his behalf. He said he might
have written the letter testified to by
Justice Brantley, but that he could not
remember.
Explaining to Senator Hoar, Mr..
Clark said that the first contribution of
$35, 900 was necessary in organizing for
the legislative campaign, a great deal
of money being required to get voters
registered and to get them to the polls.
:7Did you ever asked Mr. Faulkner,
directly or indirectly make any money
orr other voluntary contributions to Sc
cure the vote of any member of the leg
islature for you for United States SEN
ator2"
mo sir I never did, responded the
witness holding himself erect and look
ing directly at his interrogator.
do you know of your own personal
knowledge of any money being used to
corruptly influence votes in your be-
half?" was the next question.
To this the senator replied: Il do not.
There were plenty of rumors about the
expenditure of money, but have no
personal knowledge of anything of that
kind being done"
Senator Clark was questioned con-
cerning his conversations with Senator
Whiteside and Mark Hewitt and his re-
ported conversation with Representa-
tive Jackson of Utah. He denied hay-
ing any conversation with Jackson and
while admitting talking with Whiteside
and Hewitt, he cOntradicted all the
statements made by them in their testi-
mony which would in any way impli-
cate him with corrupt methods in the
legislature. He said that on one oc-
casion he had met Mr.. Whiteside at the
Helena hotel when the latter had come
to him saying: Il have good news for
you; I have induced Senator Anderson
to vote for you.
Senator Clark said he had told White
side that he was pleased to hear this
because he and Mr.. Anderson had long
been friends and he confidently counted
upon his vote before the final ballot
should be taken. Mr.. Clark said posi-
lively that Mr.. Anderson was the only
member of the legislature spoken of in
this conversation and he explicitly de-
MED saying that Mr.. Anderson could
not be influenced with money like other
members. He also denied having told
Whiteside that c. w. Clark or Mr..
Welcome, or any one else was his
agent. Mr.. Clark admitted that he had
met Mark Hewitt often during the sit
ting of the legislature as Mr.. Hewitt
had professed to be q friend of his IN
his sena torial contest. Their conVersa-
tions had, however, he said, been so
completely devoid of feature that he did
not remember any of them.
He was sure he had never told Hewitt
as the latter had testified that he con-
Sidered WhiteSide reliab for he had
not talked with him concerning White
side;' that he had ever told Hewitt after
the Whiteside so-called exposure that
they would make the people believe
that Mr.. DAILY had furnished the $780,,
OO0
His did however. remember that Hewitt
had told him that Lyons was making
some trouble about his expenses in the
With reference TO the testimony of Leg
islator Jackson of Utah, Mr.. Clark said
he had no recollection whatever of hav-
ing met that gentleman and that he was
sure that he (Clark) had not tried to in
Huence Jackson TO vote 1Or MI. McCQne
for United States senator from Utah. He
was equally sure that he had made no
corrupt or improper proposals to Jacks
son in that connection and that ne had
not told him that he (Clarl) had just pur-
chased the vote of the Montana legisla-
ture in his own behalf. Equally certain
was he that he had never said to Mr..
Jackson or anyone else. that Senator
Hanna, of Ohio, had secured his election
to the senate by corrupt means.
Il am absolutely positive" said Senator
Clark, concluding his direct testimony;
L
any conversation with him, or any one
else relative to the manner of Senator
every word of Jackson's testimony which
related to me was absolutely false"
mittee asked Mr.. Clark in regard to the
letter to DR.. Martin of the Montana col
Brantley had testified earlier in the day.
Mr. Clark replied that he had no recol-
he might have written it, as his relation
with DIR. Martin was very intimate, as
was also his relation with Judge Brant-
ley and he knew the relationship to be
so between Martin and Brantey. He was
questioned closely. as to his recollection
as to the authorship of a letter written
last October or November. He replied:
i may have written the letter to Dr.
Martin to see Justice Brantley, but GER
tainly did not go to the extent of ask
ing him to suggest to Judge Brantley that
the proceedings against welcome should
be stopped. 7 admit that I was greatly
interested in Welcomes case. being con-
vinced as the letter referred saws that
he is both a grand and a good man. [
do not however. wish to be understood,
if I did write the letter, of suggesting
any means of approaching him which was
not perfectly legitimate. AS to recoIlect-
ing whether 1 wrote the letter l repeat
that l can not say positively. My CORE
spondence is probably as large as that of
almost any other In the United
States. / write from 50 to 100 letters a
day and it is not probable that 7 would
remember whether l had written this let
ter on a matter which I did not consider
very important. If 1 did write it, sim
ply did so to have DR.. Martin use his in
f1uence with Judge Prantley to see that
justice was done Mr.. Welcome Mr.
Clarke was still the stand when the
committee took a. recess till 2:15 p. m.
TO FIGHT MAY 18TH.