The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-02-27
Didn't Contribute, However, Until He
Was Accused of Being Engaged
in "VilIainous Conspiracy"
HAD NO PERSONAL FEELING
"ANY STATEMENT OF THAT KIND is
A vILLAINOUS LIE" HE SAID.
rendered His Checks md CheckboOkz
tiOn by the Senate Committee.

the millionaire miner of Montana. was the
principal witness before the Senate COM
he was on the stand for about two hours
and at the expiration of this time was ex-
cused on the plea that he was not we'll
and that the questioning process fatigued
him. He preserved a smiling face through
out tue investigation. Mr.. DAILY confessed
that he had contributed $4,000 or $4,000 to
the prosecution of this case. but asserted
that he had not entered into any con-
sriracy before Mr.. Clark's election to in
jLre him. He had not contributed any of
the $50, 600 used in the Whiteside exposure.
In conclusion he rendered his checks and
check books ,or the past five years for
the inspection CT the committee. Mr.. Clark
listened attentively to Mr.. Dalys testi-
mony.
In beginning his testimony Mr.. DAILY
stated he was ffty-eight years of age and
that his business was that of mining He
knew Mr.. Clark and Mr. Whiteside, and
had known Mr.. Clark a long time He
first contributed to the campaign when it
was organized, to the extent of about
800, later to the extent of $500, also $500
in Deer Lodge county and $3.50 on various
other occasions. He had never, he said,
sought to compel miners employed by him
to vote according to his sentiments. AS
q 4. l.
nothing for the purpose of defeating Mr..
Clark.
did you ever during the session Of the
Legislature give any money toward the de-
feat of Mr.. Clark?"
mo. did not, not one dollar Mr. DAILY
replied.
DALY'S TALK WITH CoRBETT.
He detailed the conversation with Mr..
Corbett in the Hotel Netherlands, differing
entirely with the statement made by Cor
bett. He said he told Corbett that he did
not think Mr.. Clark would seriously urge
Nis candidacy for the Senate as he could
not be elected. Mr.. DAILY denied that he
language attributed to him
by Corbett, that if Clark's name made it's
appearance, "you will hear something drop"
which is on deposit with the committee,
and is alleged to have been bribe money.
He said he knew nothing about this money
and had nothing to do with advancing it,
as had been intimated. He also specifically
denied the statement of a former witness
that DAILY had told him every man who
supported Clark would be denounced as a
boodler and bribetaker.
"Did you ever seek to influence members
of the Legislature as to the election of a
United States senator.
mo, SIR
did you ever seek to influence the Judi
ciary of Montana in that Connection"
mo. sir, never got close enough to them
for anything of that kind"
"Are you one of the contributors toward
this prosecution?"
YES" answered Mr.. Daily.
He went on to say that after Mr. Clark's
nomination, he (Mr. Clark had charged
that he was the subject of CONSPIRACY"
and as Mr.. Clark courted an investigation.
Mr.. DAILY said he concluded to permit the
matter to be thoroughly investigated.
To questions by Mr.. Hoar. Mr.. DAILY said
the $3.50 which he had contributed was
given to the campaign committee from
time to time, in response to circulars, stat
ing their needs, and was for the usual cam
paign expenses. 1t had nothing to do with
the Senate contest. Mr.. DAILY said Mr.
Campbell, Mr.. Whiteside and several other
members of the State committee were
those who joined him in agreeing to pros
ecute the case. There was to be a contri-
hrrffn tn
yers. expenses of witnesses, etc.
How much have you contributed thus
far?" asked Mr.. Hoar.
81 have not the checks he replied, "but
1t amounts to between $4,000 and $500 I"
He explained that this was used for the
expenses of the prosecution. 1t was paid
over to Mr.. Campbell. Mr.. Campbell stated
to the committee that when he took the
stand he would give the full details of the
matter.
DISCRIMINATION.
Mr.. Faulkner then directed the cross
examination. The first question related to
Mr.. Daly's participation in the various
local elections Of Montana. This, the wit
ness said. did not extend beyond Silver
Bow and Deer Lodge counties. as his busi-
ness interests took him there most He
knew little to what going on else
where beyond what he saw In the papers
When asked If he knew that Mr.. Clark
became candidate because OF fraudulent
primaries. Mr.. DAILY said this could not
be the case. as the primaries were not
fraudulent and were not 50 attacked until
Mr.. Clark had aeen defeated at one OF
the county conventions.
Mr. DAILY said he did not know the other
contributors to the campaign. except that
he understood Mr.. Clark gave $500. AS to
the campaign in Silver Bow. he said he
thought the candidates furnished most OF