The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-04-04
THE MONTANA ENQUIRY.
Argument of Counsel on the Part Of
the MemoriaItsts

| %
the MemoriaIists.
The arguments OF counsel in the Montana
Senatorial election case were begun yes
! terday before the Senate Committee on
Privileges and Elections. There were pres
ent OF the committee Messrs. Chandler,
Chairman; Burrows Pritchard, Turiey,
Harris. Pettus. and McComas With the
I exception OF members of the press the
public was excluded.
The arguments were opened by Mr.. Bir-
ney, Of Washington, associate counsel for
the nlemorialists. against Senator Clark.
He submitted that ii had been abuadantly
proved that general corruption had been
practiced in the Senatorial campaign. and
that Senator Clark was cognizant of 1t.
Mr.. Clark. he said. having been de-
feated in previous efforts to be elected to
the Senate and other Offices. had deter
mined in 1898 to win a seat in the United
States Senate. without regard to cost He
was very rich man; and he relied upon
his wealth to win the fight. He had con-
tributed immense amounts to that end.
Mr.. Birney referred at some length to the
testimony bearing on those points. He
quoted that of Mr.. Clark himself, which
showed, Mr.. Birney said, that he had given
s139 900 to the committee which had charge
of his campaign, and had never received
a statement as TO what had been done
with the money. Il did not ask them for
it," was Mr.. Ciark's statement. Il knew
! that they uhe committee) were men who
would handle the money judiciously, and
l never called upon them for any report
as to how they spent it,"
THE committee will see,'' Mr.. Birney
proceeded. that on this part OF Senator
Clark's testimony We lay great stress-on
| the fact that he cioeed his eyes and
stopped his ears, and made no enquiry as
to the money which he had placed in the
hands Of that committee. He made abb
solutely no enquiry as to how they spent
it. He gave no directions as to how they
should spend it. He closed his eyes to
their methods and asked no questions"
| Mr.. Birney said he would avoid harsh
expressions or vituperation, but he could
not help saying that, of all the witnesses
who had testified for the defence, Senator
Clark had placed himself In the mos
unenviable position. NO, I will not =,
50 far as that" Mr.. Birney added,
way of correction, for one or two uf
nave themselves dDSOtutely
repulsive to all men of common honesty"
The attorney ccntrasted part Of Sena-
tor Clark's testimony before the commit
tee with a part OF a deposition made by
him in Montana, and he asked whether
those discrepancies and contradictions
tended to present the Senator in the light
of witness TO whom full credit should be
given.
Mr. Faulkner. leading counsel for Sem
atn iarlr fpfa af-fa hi a
remarked that there was no such incon-
sistency or contradiction as Mr.. Biruey
claimed
Mr.. Birney commented severely on the
declination by Senator Clark to produce
his original books and records, and said
that no business consideration could have
prevented him from producing before the
committee original records that might ae-
quit him of the charge CT criminal con-
duct. He (Nir. Birney) could not accept
the excuse of an objection to disclose busi-
ness operations. As to Mr. DAILY Senator
Clark's chief opponent, his testimony, Mr.
Brney argued was absolutely unchal-
lenged. As against Senator Clark's con-
tributions OF 900 to committeeman Of
his own choice Mr. Daily had contributed
throughout the campaign $3.50. and had
offered access TO all his books and bank
accounts for Investigation by the COM
mittee
Contrast" Mr. Birney said, these
regular payments by Mr.. Daily TO the
county and State committees with those
secret payments made by Senator Clark
and his friends 10 individual candidates
for the Legislature. and We will leave the
committee to say which of the two men
was making the greater struggle and
which one sought the greatest return"
Mr.. Birney drew a parallel between the
Clark case and the Caldwell case. from
Kansas, twenty seven years ago in which
latter case faccordiug to a speech in the
Senate at the timej the talk OF corruption
was so common and SO well understood by
everybody so strong and overwhelming.
that Just before the election resolution
had been offered and agreed to in the
House of Delegates calling upon members
10 stand up and say whether or no: they
Tad been bribed.
That" Mr.. Birney said, fits wcll the
conditions here for We find that. because
OF the efforts in progress there were those
same conditions of generalization in
Helena when the Legislature of Montana
met in January. 1899. as there had been
in Kansas twenty-seven years before
On approaching the testimony of Mr..
Whiteside the chief witness on the part
of the prosecution. Mr.. Birney said that
he expected to hear Mr. Whiteside de-
rounced as a spy and the argument made
that, being a spy, his testimony was not
to be believed.
That depends upon circumstances said
MIR Birney. 1T depenGs upon circum-
stances whether the term spy is TO be
considered a dishonorable one or not. There
have been spies in the history Of this Re-
public whom the people have delighted tc
honor Major Nathan Hale was one OF
them Patriotic citizens raise monuments
% his memory. the school children are
taught that he rendered great service &c
his country. There is no evidence that
Mr. Whiteside, in what he did. had any
other motive than TO render a great SER
vice to his State. and you must therefore
accord him your respect
Mr.. Birney made much of the testimony
concerning the bribery Of MIR. Woods. a
member Of the legislature. He quoted the
letter from Senator Clarl's trusted agent"
Mr.. Bickford. to DR.. Ector. enquiring as
to whether there was any mortgage OF
Woods ranch or whether he was under
obligations of a pecupiary nature. And
having learned that there was a mortgag,
of ST. 500 on Woods ranch. said Mr. Birney.
Mr. Bickford got $1,000 from Charlie Clark
and gave it to Ector for the purpose-al-
though the matter afterward fell through
Mr. Birney commented on the testimony
in the cases Of Day, Bywater and Fine
members of the Legislature, 10 whom llrge
sums of money had been traced which they
had not been able to account for. Day
he said had attempted tO account for
s.. 600 of the amount which he had de-
posted in a bank at Helena, the day after
the Legislature had adjourned By saying