Omaha daily bee., 1900-01-09
LAY TRAP TO CATCH CLARK
Discrimination Of Witness Brings Out
No New Facts.
BELIEVES END JUSTIFltS METHODS
Admits Lying to Montana Senator for
Purpose of Exposing Corrup-
tion-Trnccs II Directly
tn Clark.
ELtVES END JUSTIFIts METHODS

WASHINGTON, Jan. s.-Former State
senator Whlteside OF Montana continued his
testimony in the Clark senatorial case before
the senate committee on privileges and cleo
lions today. He was cross-examined by ex-
Senator Faulkner. The examination brought
out the fact that Mr.. Whitcside, as a mem
Der OF a committee to investigate the state
capitol commission, had made a minority
report charging corruption. He was asked
II this was the case in which he had sug-
sested to J. p. McCabe that the minority re-
port could be suppressed for $4,000, but de-
MED that such was the case. He said his
sole purpose in undertaking the exposure Of
bribery in the Legislature that elected MIR.
Clark was to protect the good name OF the
state.
81 desired he said, Ito have someone
accept the money so as to expose the meth
DDS OF Mr.. Clark"
Did you become a friend Of Mr.. Clark's
friends for the purpose Of entrapping them ?"
II cant say, exactly, but | suppose l did"
I'm doing this didn't you know you we're
assuming an attitude of Misrepresentation ?"
81 did
WAS this not a position Of falsehood?'
IL cant say as to that. but l had to make
a number Of Misrepresentation"
what He Considered n Lie.
what do you consider a lie?"
Il consider a lie a misstatement to one
who has a right to know the truth-not to
one who has no right to know it,"
Mr.. Whiteside said he did not see how any
honest man could vote for Mr.. Clark after
the exposure Of the committee on investiga-
ton, and added, under pressure, that the re-
mark applied to the ffty-four members of
the legislature who cast their votes for that
gentleman.
He said, in reply to a question, that Mar
Gus DAILY was an acquaintance of his, not a
friend, though he should be glad to have him
for a friend.
Have you received 1876, 900 for this pre-
tended exposure?" asked Mr.. Faulkner.
II have not received $35, 900 or any other
sum for that service" the witness replied.
Relating to his conversation held with
Senator Clark prior to the ~latter's election,
he said he was positive that Mr.. Clark him
self had said, among other things, that State
Senator Anderson could not be influenced
with money like some Of the other members,
and that this statement was not made by
Mr.. Welcome as appeared in the printed
report of his testimony before the grand
jury Of Lewis and Clark county.
The witness said the money to pay for the
present prosecution had been raised by sub
scription, and he understood that Mr.. Daily
was one Of the subscribers to the fund. The
cross-examination further brought out that
the witness had no personal knowledge of
bribery in the case of three of the members
of the assembly who had been referred to.
At noon the committee took a recess I'M
til 2:30 p. m.
New statement Brought Out.
When the hearing was resumed the cross
examination of Mr.. Whiteside continued. The
main direction of the questioning was to
bring out points of differences between the
witnesses statements now and those made
before the grand jury. One of the ques-
tions brought ont a new statement from
Whiteside that his knowledge that bribery
was going on was confirmed when a party
to that transaction took from his pocket
a roll of bills and said:
That's what we do the business with"
The cross-examination sought to bring out
the circumstances OF an alleged meeting be-
tween the witness and an election official
who held the ballots in the election in
which Whiteside had participated. The wit
ness was asked If he had not offered 81, 900
for the ballots. Whiteside denied that this
had occurred and asserted that he had proof
to show that a party had been paid to make
such a statement against him. He said that
a prosecution instituted against him in this
connection was due to prejudice and was in
spired by one OF Clark's associates.
At one point Pettus Of the committee OBJ
jected to having the witness "badgered" by
counsel. Former Senator Edmunds of
counsel against Clark said many of the
questions had been improper, but they were
rot objected to, as the widest latitude was
desired in testing the witness.
Whiteside then went over the circum-
stances of his being authorized to offer SIS, 900
to each of two member with $500 down, on
condition that their votes would be forth
coming, il desired. He was closely ques-
toned on all the details.
The cross-eXamination of Whiteside was
still in progress when the committee
adjourned until 1915 tomorrow morning.