Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1900-04-18
DIRECT AND CIRCJMSTANIIAL.
Evidence OF Either NTture Sufficient to
Cause Rejection o. Clark's Claim.

Cause Rejection O. Clark's Claim.
Washington, April 10.-The senate com-
mittee on privileges and elections today
decided by a unanimous vote to recon-
mend the adoption a a resolution declar-
ing that Hon. w. A Clark OF Montana is
not entitled to occipy his seat as senator
from Montana. The decision was reached
after a two hours sitting, at which all
members OF the committee we're presenter
cept one. The absentee was Senator CAT
fiery, and he wired his vote in opposition
to Clark. A ballot was not taken until all
the members pre,ent had expressed them
selves upon tn, question, some Of them
speaking at soue length, and all OF them
expressing different shades OF opinion.
Harris indicated the most pronounced
leaning toward lenieucy for Clark. He did
not express a,y doubt that there had been
a lavish expenditure of money in Clark's
behalf. and while not condoning this course
he spoke in terms OF strong condemnation
of the tactics pursued by Clark's oppon.
ents, referring especially to Congressman
Campbell and ex-senator Whiteside. He
said that whatever Clark's o%iienses, they
were but little worse than the methods
pursued by Campbell and Whiteside in
their efforts to expose the senator, and be
insisted that il the report was to be antag.
onistic to Clark it should at the same time
relate in full detail the course pursued by
the two principal witnesses against him.
Pettus practically agreed with Harris.
The two senator's also expressed some
doubt az to the Justification OF the conclu-
sion drawn by n majority OF the commit
tee that Clark's candidacy for senator be-
gan in August. 1898, when he returned to
Butte from New York. The effect OF this
conclusion was TO charge up the entire
$4,000, which Clark confessed to having
expended, to his campaign for senator,
while the contention was made in Clark's
behalf that he did not become a candidate
until after the state election, thus elimin-
ating from the campaign in his individual
behalf the money spent in the general con.
test.
McComas was among the senator's who
expressed themselves as convinced that
the senatorial seat was in view from the
beginning. McComas, however, united with
the other senators in condemning the
methods pursued in prosecuting the case.
The concensus OF opinion of the commit
tee appeared unfavorable to accepting any
one especial feature against Clark as a
basis for the report against him, the en-
eral opinion being that it was the umu
lative character OF the testimony that
should be considered rather than any es.
pecial detail.
Harris raised n point in Clark's behalf
that the cumulative effect OF the testimony
could not properly be considered, but be
was overruled in his position. II promi-
nence WAS given to any one line Of testi-
mony more than another, it was thatdeal
ing with transactions apparently OF a bust
ness nature between Clark or his agents
with the members OF the legislature. The
purchase Of property from Senator Warren
and Representative Mclaughlin and the
money rendered Representative Wood to
lift the mortgage from his ranch we're con-
sidered as bearing directly on the case. OF
these matters the Wood case received sspc-
cial attention.
The payment OF money to Representa-
tive Day after Clark's election also had
.ai,bt Nh. a.infnu yaa axnraaaa,l tkat
no one OF these facts WAS "A sufficient basis
for AN adverse report, but all agreed that
all the facts, many OF them admitted, to-
gether with other occurrences, were sutfi.
against the senator's continuing to hold
the place. The fact that Clark aud his
representative had failed to make their re.
ports to the state authorities of Montana,
as required by the state law, was also
urged against him in the discussion in com
mittee. as was the Tact thar he and his
representatives, had destroyed all their
vouchers showing what money had been
used and to whom it IA paid. When at
tentiun was called to the fact that this
course as usual with campaign managers,
the statement was met with the cOnten-
ton that while that plan might bs more
commonly adopted than it should he, still
there could be- nc reasonable excuse Tor it
after the Whiteside exposure. 1t WAS then
known there would be a contest and the
argument was made that every scrap of
paper bearing upon the election should
have been preserved after this develop
ment in the case.
Chandler and Turley we're directed to
prepare the report. 1t is expected to b"
presented at an early day. Clark was at
the capitol when the announcement OF the