The Portland daily press., 1900-04-11
AGAINST CLARK.
Senate Committee Votes to
ExpeI him.
r2f9
The Vote Unanimous
Against Montana Man.
Different Shades Of Opinion Ex.
pressed By Members.
Mr.. Harris Most In
clined To Leniency.
Question About Length of His
Campaign.
Question About Length of His
Campaign.

N9auAHktyhe aRAh ~N-"-~
committse on privileges and eisotions TO-
day decided by . unanimous vote % REQ
ommsnd the adoption Of resoiutien de-
olaring that Hen. W. A. Clark OF Mon
tanA, is not entitled to occupy his seat 40
Q Senator from Montana. The decision
was reached after two hours sitting at
which all the members Of the eoEamitsss
we're present exsspt one The abssntse
was Senator Caffery OF Louisiana. and
he wired his vote In opposition 10 Mr..
Clark. The ballot was not taken until
all the members present had expressed
themselves upon the question, some Of
them speakiug at some length and all
expires, Il az different shades Of opinion.
Senator Hsrris Of Kansas Indicated
the most pronounced leaning toward
lenisncy for Mr.. Clark. He did not ex-
press any doubt that there had been
lavish expenditure Of money In Mr..
Clark's behalf. and while not oondoning
this course, he spoke In terms Of strong
condemnation Of the tactics pursued BY
some of Clark's opponents. referring
especially to Congressman Uampbeil and
| former State Senator White side. he said
that whatever we're Mr.. Clark 3 offsnsss
hey were but little worse than the meth
ods pursued by Campbsll and Whiteside
in their efforts to expose the Senator,
and he insisted that II the report was TO
be antagonistic to Mr.. Clark 1t shoIld
| ut the same time, relate In full detail the
course pursued BY the two principal Wit
nessss against him.
Senator Psttus practically agreed with
Mr.. harris. The two Senators also ex
PRESSED some doubt ~ to the juttincation
OF the conclusion drawn BY ms Jrity OF
this committee, that Senator ClArk's can
didacy for the Senate began in August.
1898. when he returned TO Butts from
New York. The effect Of thia conolu-
sion was to charge up the entire Ss9.oOo
which Senator Clark confessed TO having
expended in his campaign for the Sen
ate. while the contention was made In
Senator Clark's behalf that he had not
bsoome a candidate until altar the slate
election, thus eliminating from the oam-
paign In his Individual bshaif the amount
spent In the general contest. Senator
McComas was among the Senators who
expressed himself as convinced that the
senatorial seat was In view from the
beginning. Mr.. MoComas. however,
united with other Senators In oondem-
ming the methods pursued in prosecuting
the Gaze. Ihe oonc0a asus of opinion Of the
committee appeared unfevorabls TO ae-
osptinR any one especial feature against
Mr.. Clark as the basis for the report
against him, the general opinion being
that IL was tine cumulative character OF
the testimony that should be considered
rather than any one special detail sen-
ator Harris RAISED the point In MIR.
| Clark's behalf that the cumulative
effect Of the testimony could not proper
iy be consi iered, but he was overrulsd in
this position.
II prominence was given to any ons
lire Of testimony more than to another
it was dealing with Transactions appar-
emily Of q regular business nature BE-
twesn the Senator or his Agsnts and
membsrs Of the Legislature. The pur-
chase Of reperty from senator Warner
| and Representative MsLaHghliu, and
ths money rendered Representative Wood
10 lift the mortgage from his ranch were
considered as bearing directly upon the
case. OF thsas matters the Mood case
received especial attention. xhs pay
msnt Of money to Representative Day
after the election of Ar. Clark also had
weight. The opini0n wsa expressed that
no ons OF thess facts was sufficient hasis
fer an adverse report, but all agreed that
all those fAota. many Of them admitted,
I, togsthAr with other occurrences connect
cd with the campaign. were sutficisnt TO
jultify Q positive position against the
Senator'S aontinuiag TO hold his place.
The fact that Senator Clark and hia
rspressp tatives had failed to make their
reports to the stats authorities OF Men
tsna. IS required By the state Law, was also
urged against him In ths discussioa In the
COMMITTEES a. was the fact that hs and MS
representative had destroyed all thsiK
4 Il