The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-02-22

bers. but none to any that was known TO
me-"
do you know Senator Warner of JEFF
ferson county,"
az do
did you transact any business with him
during the session OF the Legisiature?"
81 did not"
DO YOU know where he Is now?''
al do not / have not seen or heard OF
him since the disbarment proceedings.
did you hear how much he was paid?'
81 did not
did you never ask Charlie Clark?
II did nci."
"pid Charlie CLARK say anything to you
about how much money was paid by fim?'
NO"
you say you drew money on your own
checks What was the amount"
THE first was for $4,000. and the next
s., 600"
Where did you get cash on them"
They were both cashed at the Montana
National Bank"
Money in Large Amounts.
Mr.. Welcome testified that he lrIy
this money out in large amounts as mat
ter of convenience. A part OF the
,, money was in thousanddollar bills.
These he exchanged at the bank at
different times for bills of smaller de-
nomination. The witn~-s told Of other
sums which he had drawn from the bank
and had obtained from Charles Clark, and
although it was not shown that any Of this
was expended for other than legitimate
purposes, 1t did show that the Senate
rial campaign In Montana cost money.
Mr. Welcome remained in Helena after
the election of United States Senator. The
witness said he was, and the Clark forces
generally were, interested In House bills
12i and 1872. Mr.. Campbell asked the wit
ness il his bank account would show MS
expenditures at Helena during that pc
riod. He said that he considered his trans
actions in the matter of these bills as
privileged relations between client and at
torney.
Then followed long colloquy as to what
constitute privileged communications. L.
was pointed out that it was during the
consideration of these bills that State Sen
ator Gieger said he found sl,10O under his
| transom.
Mr.. Welcome said he kept an expense
account Of all matters connected with
House bills 124 and 1872 but he kept no
| account of his disbursements In the Sen
| atorial contest Mr.. Campbell questioned
I the witness closely as TO his expenditures
in the matter Of the legislation indicated.
| 1t was not maintained that those matters
| bore other than remote relation to the
| Senatorial contest.
| Mr.. Campbell asked: How many con-
| ferences did you have with Wniteside
II do not know"
I'm the disbarment proceedings against
| yourself. did you take The stand in your
own defence?'
81 did not"
will you explain to the committee why
that was?"
Because / felt that * would be OF no
use as / was convinced that the Supreme
| Court had made up their minds as to their
| decision and that no evidence which 1
| could give would change their bias
Were you willing to rest under the
imputation cast upon you, before the peo-
| pie of Montana"
| "The people of Montana-that is. the
! great mass of them-understood as well as
| that the Supreme Court was biased
In giving his reasons for this belief Of his
he said that the decision Of the court in
the matter of his demurrer showed to him
that the court was not considering the
/ case in conformity with the law and the
| evidence.
Mr. Campbell pressed the witness close
ly as 10 his reasons for considering the SUI
preme Court of Montana as a part Of the
DAILY machine.
Senator Pettus insisted that it was a
general rule OF law that the failure OF a
| witness to testify in his own behalf should
not be considered against him. Senator
Caffery took the same position.
The Afternoon Session.
When the committee reassembled after
the noon recess Mr.. Faulkner asked the
witness II he did not. when witness be-
fore the grand jury of Lewis and Clarke
county. testify that he did not know Of
the improper use OF any money in the
Clark Senatorial contest. Mr.. Welcome
answered affirmatively.
| Mr.. Faulkner said that he was prepared
| TO submit to the committee the statement
of the bank account and memoranda OF
payments kept by Mr.. Welcome. Senator
Chandler said he could not feel that he
had done his whole duty II he did not In
sst upon examining such accounts OF MT.
Welcome ald Charles W. Clark In so lar
as those accounts related to the Senatorial
contest.
Counsel for the memoriallsts declared
that they did not insist upon the produe-
ton of the papers, but suggested TO the
committee that IL might order the account
They would insist, though. that II the pa
pers were introduced as evidence they
should have the right to eross-examihe
the witness. ,.us
ON motion Of Senator Hoar, Senators
Chandler and Caffery were named as
subcommittee to examine the papers ana
report TO the full committee as to their
relevancy to the case.
senator Hoar asked: Were you In any,
way connected with the Capitol contest.
. aonIy In the most casual way. MY
4 mariner at that time. Mr.. Corbett. was IN
terested in behalf of Helena. ! think ne
was not employed by Senator clark, uu'
took the part of Helena from pa'rlo'i'
motives" r,,r,s,.
In reply to question by Senator Turiey'
the witness said that the DAILY people main