The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-04-23
BRIBERY CERTAIN.
Continued From First Page.)


ter, were. has already been found. The /
circumstances of suspicion against the /
others are numerous
Senator S. S. Hobson is mainly re- /
sponsible for the action of the Republi- |
can members. He was the chairman of /
their caucus and the leader in the Clark I
movement He early began negotiations
with Mr.. Clark, and the latter's written /
promise that he would be an independ- |
ent tariff Democrat was addressed to |
Mr. Hobson under date of January 16.
A STRONG CASE.
In the face of all the facts tending |
to impeach the conduct of so many of |
the Republican members and of the evil |
dent political reasons why they should
not have contributed their votes to the
election of Senator Clark, a Democrat,
under~the charges of corruption, the
finding that Senator Clark's election
was obtained by corrupt practices in the
opinion of the majority is much
strengthened by the action of the eleven
Republicans, who on the fourth day of
January, abandoned their own party
and thus strangely elected a Democratic
senator"
The committee sees the direct viola
ton by Senator Clark and his commit
tee and agents of the provisions of the
Montana laws are of the first import
ance in connection with the conclusions
reached by committee. On this point
the committee adds the following:
He expended sum vastly in excess
of the limit provided by law and failed
to render any return; and no such re-
turn was made by the persons acting in
his behalf
Referring to the destruction of checks
and voucher it is remarked that the
| committee of the case proved without
relying upon such a destruction of
| checks failure to render account and
| disregard of the legal limit of expendi-
ture. But they furnish to the commit
! tee strong additional reasons for be-
! lieving the other evidence which seems
to them to establish the corruption
charged
Only two points of law are presented,
| as follows:
/. 1t is clear that if by bribery OF cor
rupt practices on the part of the friends
| Of a candidate who are conducting his
| canvass votes are obtained for him,
| without which he would not have had a
| majority, his election should be an
nulled although proof is lacking that
he knew of the bribery or corrupt prac-
| tice.
q It seems to have been admitted
that if the person elected clearly par
ticipated in any one act of bribery
or attempted bribery, he should be de-
prived of his office, although the re-
suit of the election was not thereby
changed.
LEGAL PHASES.
Commenting on the legal phases of
| the case, the committee says:
According to the law, as understood
| by the committee, Senator Clark can
not be permitted to retain his seat. He
! against him. leaving him an apparent
| majority of Is. If he obtained through
illegal and corrupt practices eight votes
which would have otherwise been cast
against him, he was not legally elected.
More than this number of votes the
committee find, from all the eVlaence,
was thus obtained
at also is a reasonable conclusion on
the whole case that Senator Clark is
fairly to be charged with knowledge Of
the acts done in his behalf by his COM
mittee and his agents conducting his
canvass He arrived in Helena from
Butte on January 4. and remained
there until his election on January 70,
and was in constant conference with
his committee and agents.
Referring to Mr.. CampbelPS connec-
ton with the case, the report says:
Much criticism has been made of the
contestants, especially of A J. Camp
bell, a member of the house of represen-
| tatiVeS and an active prosecutor OF the
| charges against Senator Clark. Some
members of the committee cannot re-
frain from expressing their d1SapproVal
of many of the methods pursued by
Campbell and Whiteside in the prose-
cution of the charges against Senator
Clark and they do not approve of the
I action of Mr.. Daily in agreeing to fur
J nish an unlimited amount OF money to
carry on the prosecution.
while it is true that bribery can
never be proved by the testimony of the
l briber, nor of the person bribed, and
that it is almost always necessary to
obtain the required information from
go-betweens, or persons who have ex-
| plOred the field and made reports back
ward and forward, as to the probability
of obtaining results by bribery,yet some
members of the committee believe thai
this does not justify the character OF
acts which are proved and established
against Mr.. Campbell. Some members
of the committee, however do not joir
= in any criticism Of Mr.. Campbell an6
Mr.. DAY.
SPECIAL CONSIDERABLE
The majority of the committee ex-
2 press the opinion that the transactions
4 concerning the judges of the supreme
4 sideration" and after relating the cir
! cumstances connected with this cpl
( Sode, remark
Upon the foregoing undisputed facts
! and other facts which are controverted
2 a majority of the committee believe
that Senator Clark's agents in thei
{ desperation on account of the decision
: of the court to take jurisdiction in tn
E Welcome case, attempted an ipprope
Y approach to the judges Of the cour
= and to Attorney General Nolan, whiel
of itself cannot but have a certain IN
fluence in the consideration of the othe
acts of the agents in connection witt
the senatorial election. A majority o
d the committee, however, believe tina
the transactions were Res Inter -Alio
:; Acta, and that the evidence does no
Is sufficiently bring home to Senate
II | Clark or his agents, any improper at
7 tempt to influence teh court or the at
Z, tOrney general.
&C The report was presented by Senate
,f Chandler for the entire committee, an
IL was not signed.
A minority of the committee did no
II approve of some of the features. TIL
n views Of the minority will be submitte
re later.
y Senator Clark refused to make an
c.fo ut 10