The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1907-03-16
BEvERIDGE DID
NOT PLAY FAIR
Indiana Senator Voted for San
Domingo Treaty While Paired
With Clark of Montana.
DID NOT CHANGE RESULT
EXPLANATIONS MADE IN THE
SENATE.
Especial to The Herald1


following explanation of his connection
with the ratification of the San Domingo
treaty. Mr.. Clark said:
Mr.. PRESIDENT rise to make an expla-
nation of matter personal to myself II
relates to the ratification of the treaty
with San Domingo ten days ago | do this
solely for the purpose of removing some
Misrepresentation throughout the country
concerning my position upon that very
important proposition.
When the vote was taken | was tempo
rarily absent from the senate The report
sent out by the Associated Press concern
ing the vote giving the yeas and nays
and the names of senators who were
Senator Clark of Montana did not vote
and was not paired.
1 thought little about this matter until
| received several letters upon the sub
ject. As we all know, this great question.
which had been pending before the SEN
ate for some two years or more. has
country and caused heated discussions,
and ] feared the Inference that might be
drawn from the published report would
be that / had evaded a vote upon the
question.
| have never attempted to evade a vote
upon any question. | have always been
ready to meet fairly and squarely any
question submitted here for consideration
and action.
l have a general pair with the senior
senator from Indiana (Mr. Beveridge). In
all the deliberations on this question IN
the committee on foreign relations / have
asserted my objection TO the treaty. When
II was finally passed upon in that COM
mittee, my vote was recorded in opposi-
ton to it
Ii has been intimated by some persons.
who obviously did not understand the
situation clearly, that / might be
charged with the responsibility of failure
to prevent the ratification of the treaty
because of my not voting or in not being
properly paired. and / Will present the
following statement to correct that i'm
preston and to show that, no matter
whether / voted or not OF was or was not
paired. the treaty would have been rati-
fled:
There were forty-three votes for the
treaty and nineteen votes against 1t, max
ing sixty-twO votes IN all
There were eighteen senators paired for
the treaty and nine senators paired
against it, making twenty-seven senators
paired.
Two-thirds of the senators who voted
would be forty-one and one-third. Had
been present there would have been
twenty votes cast against the treaty
making sxty-three votes altogether,
two thirds of which are forty-two, leav-
ing still one majority. for the treaty
Had my pair been observed by Mr. Bev-
eridge in my absence and had been
paired with one other senator. the vote
would have been forty-one for the treaty
and nineteen against it.
Sixty votes in all would have been cast,
IWO-InlIUS Vi WHICH, Civ WY -
vote more than necessary to ratity the
treaty
To summarize, had my pair been OBJ
served and IL l had been paired with one
other senator. there would have been cast
fortv-one votes for the treaty; twenty SEN
ators would have been paired In 1avor
of the treaty, making siXty-one tor the
treaty; there would nave Dee cast Isl, nIel1
stors would have been paired against IL,
making twenty-nine against the treaty,
still leaving one vote over the two-lnlr9s
necessary to ratify II, thus showing, MI
President that through no action OF mine
could the final result have been changeq-
The vote took place here late at night,
and / was absent. 1 dld not supPSse ina ma
the treaty would come up al that late
hour. No notice had been given Whatever
of the matter.
MI Beyeridge-Mr. President, L am
very glad the senator from Montana (Mr
CIaTk9 has so clearly demonstrated that
his absence and my failure to observe the
nair did not change the result one the
vote on the Santo Domingo treaty IoT
tba senator has demonstrated that, ana
Demonstrated to the entire country that
anv blame which attaches for the sue
cess of that matter, If anyone CONSIDERS
it a blame. does not In any wise IsSt On
heer the same according TO the senator
undeniable figures, in any event Never
fheless Mr. President, that does not re-
lieve me from the necessity, anu iluesu
dntv of explaining to the senator from
%WI n,s;aD M the non-observance of the pair,
which he had right TO expect would De
observed and which heretofore ouriEs
orr seven years of mutual service mas al
va1,s 5een observed by each of us.
THE senator from Montana during the
! ,resenf session has as all the senate
knows, been so regular ana constant IN
attendance on the sessions of the senate
and In the discharge of the duties OF MS
office. and there have been so many
| votes when we were both present that L
did not observe on that Gay 'hat t th S sell
ator was not in his seat AT the last
| meeting of the foreign relations commit
! tee as indeed at all prior meetings, ne
| had been present, as ne nad, MINK, on
| tho occasion of every vote that has been
taEe, on every question during the pres
ont session: and not until today was L
aware that the senator was absent on
/ that particular OCCASION VI COURSE, tle
Years of proof. and it ought not even TO
/ require the assertion, that mad l known
The senator was absent l would nave
withheld my vote a.. .s,...
| .bat Immediately afterwards L was called
! oi,t of the chamber, ana say 10 the SEN
| otor and to the senate that not until to-
/ tiavi was / aware that any criticism nad
/ hasn made of the senator for the defeat
~ the measure. 1 am particularly glad
10 make this acknowledgment 10 tne
senator, and also to congratulate tne SEN
| .tnr 1,non the fact that. regardless OF the
/ oair he has demonstrated to the senate
ID 70 his colleagues on that side that his
orasance or even the observance of the
pair would not have affected the result
There is this one thing which think it
| fair 40 saw. and say IL without any more
/ rr;ticism of the senator than he has made
/ 80 ,,,e-vhich has been none at all-that |
| thtnE on a matter of such Importance,
when The senator had been at all times
nrssent during the session and knew that
= r,ae Ia be absent on that occasion, IT
~. 10 only fair to let me know of the sem
sto5,s contemplated absence, so that |
wo,,ld have been in no danger of not OBJ
ssrvinp the pair. That has occurred be-
t1-oen both the senator and myself on at
isast three or four other critical matters.
Mr. President think l have nothing
x,r-e n saw. The exact accuracy of the
ststsments. both of the senator and my
| seIs viii he recognized by all
Mr. clark of Montana-Mr- President,
,r~t-a word in reply to the senator from
y,diana fMr. Beveridge). l did not for a
1aon,ent think the senator from Indiana
would disregard knowingly and willfully
t;s nair with me. | have too much re-
snect and esteem for him to believe that
| ne would be capable OF doing such a
| thing and endeavored to set out in my
faU remarks clearly that my object was
not in the least to criticise his action but
| sinanlv to place myself clear upon this
question to which l have always been IN