OCR Text |
Show fflarcus Dalp-'On ' tbe Witness Stand ' I Washington, Feb. 27. The proceed ings of the senate committee on privileges privi-leges and elections in the case of Senator Sena-tor Clark of Montana today dealt with the hank accounts of some of the members mem-bers of the Montana legislature. One of these accounts was that of Representative Repre-sentative Stephen Bywater of Flathead Flat-head county, who deiwsited $15,000 in the Kank of Montana at Helena on the :;d of last March, after the adjournment adjourn-ment of the legislature. Mr. Bywater was put on the stand, lie said that he had brought $6,000 of this sum to Helena with him and kept it in his trunk all winter, while $5,000 he had received from his brother as purenas" nione on a sale of mining stock, lie declared that he had not received re-ceived any pay for his vote for Mr. Clark for the senate, bufsaid that Mr. "W hiteside had told him that he could get $".,(iii0 for supporting Mr. Clark. Other witnesses of the day were Clerk Rickerts of the Montana state supreme court, T. C. Kurtz of the Montana Mon-tana National bank, both new witnesses, wit-nesses, and Attorney General Nolan, Mr. Whiteside and R. G. Poller recalled. re-called. Attorney General Nolan was recalled to add to the information already given by him concerning the Montana election elec-tion laws. This he did, citing all the provisions of the state law nearing on the subject. Mr. Nolan stated that he had given small sums of money to persons per-sons who had gone over the state in search of testimony in this case. The money had been supplied by Mr. Campbell. Camp-bell. He had also procured $500 from Mr. Campbell as a gift from Mr. Daly for the editor of an agricultural news- jitLjier m Jieieiia.. Anoth-r item charged to him was $2.fi'i0. which had been advanced to pay the expenses of witnesses in the Wellcome Well-come disbarment proceedings. This money had been received from Mr. Campbell and most of it advanced by the state treasurer to secure him for the payment of these expense's. Mr. Nolan said that he had advised the Ftate treasurer to pay these expenses upon the assurance that the expenditure expendi-ture would be made good. Among others to whom Mr. Nolan's Account showed that he had paid expense ex-pense money for collecting evidence in the disbarment case was the clerk of the state supreme court. Mr. Foster seized upon this fact to put the witness wit-ness through a pretty severe sharp cross-examination to show that this oflkial was transcending his official duties, the case being before the court of which he was an official. Mr. Nolan naid that the clerk had gone to several points to investigate evidence. He had paid him J3" purely for expenses and not as an addition to his salary. The question of the payment of $500 to a Helena newspaper was also gone into at length. The money was given to a man named Greenfield, who. it ap- i peared. was also a correspondent of some eastern papers. Mr. Nolan said I that after the Whiteside exposure lifty-two of the fifty-six papers in Montana Mon-tana were engaged in denouncing Mr. Whiteside, and this condition of affairs , being placed before Mr. Daly, he had t volunteered to give the man $500. Mr. Nolan also detailed a eonverea- tion with Greenfield, in which he said that the latter had told him that Mr. Clark had tried to change .hie (Greenfield's) (Green-field's) account of tthe Whiteside episode, epi-sode, which he had resisted, and that then Mr. Clark had offered him employment employ-ment at $20 a day. Henry G. Rickerts, clerk of the Montana Mon-tana state supreme court, was put on i.- controvert the testimony given by Thomas F. Lyons to the effect that Mr. Campbell had offered him $5,000 to make false statements before this committee. com-mittee. He taid he had feen Lyons on the day of line Whiteside exposure, when Lyons told him of his connection wn.il tne orioery oi memoers oi ine legislature. leg-islature. Lyons then said, according to the wimeiss, ho had "fixed" two members of the legislature, and that anotlher would vote as he wanted him to . . . In March last he eaid he had another conversation with Lyons, in which the latter. had told him that he had made a little money out of Clark's election, mentioning $3,000, an-d saying that he riot only had that amount, but more. Mr. Rickerts said ihat at tihis time Mr. Lyons had also told him that the purchase pur-chase of the Warner property by C. W. Clark wars not bona fide, and that the property was sold for taxes in 1K99. On another occasion Lyons told him that he had told Mr. Campbell all he knew of the proceedings in the Clark ! interest. On cross-examination Mr. Rickerts said tlhat his interest in the Clark matter mat-ter was due to the faet that he had at-steted at-steted in the election of State Senator Warner as an anti-Clark man, and was disgusted with the course he had taken in voting for Mr. Clark. What he had done was dime with the view of exposing expos-ing Mr. Warner's conduct. Continuing 'his testimony. Mr. Rickerts Rick-erts said that he had failed to place the faots in his possession before the grand jury because he had promised oii jit- im'umj iivt icr-i.i in?, rr ifi, he 'had not told it until after Mr. Lyon liin seif said to him that he h--1 told Mr. Campbell. Mr. T. C. Kurts. cashier of thv ,rv. tana National bank of Helena, wsjs put on the stand to give testimony concerning concern-ing the bsnk deposits made by members mem-bers f the last legislature from August, Au-gust, to September. ISM. He also brought the accounts of Senator Clark and Mr. Wellcome. All of rhem were referred to a sub-committee for examination. exam-ination. Mr. Whit wide, the first witness of the case, and who, in some respects, may be considered the prosecuting witness, was recalled for rebuttal purposes. He first related his meeting with Ben Hill in Butte, when the latter made his affidavit as to the transactions in Helena, Hel-ena, while he was there supporting Mr. Clark for the senate. Mr. Whiteside said he had not suggested sug-gested to Mr. Hill any statement to be made in the affidavit. Hill had inti-mated inti-mated at that time that ho wanted financial a.sni stance, but none had been, then given him. He denied that he had given Mr. Hill any money for testifying testify-ing in the Wellcome disbarment case, or that he had given any money for Pr. Minshall. Mr. Whiteside -also referred at some length to the testimony of Mr. Jas- quith and the witness Kingwait. He was especially emphatic and sweeping in .'his contradictions of Ringwalt. asserting, as-serting, practically, that there was no truth in any of that witness testimony. Referring to the testimony of John Burns. Mr. Whiteside naid he had never nev-er told Mr. Burns that he meant to "job" Mr. Clark, for he had no such intention; in-tention; his intention, however, was to show up bribery whurevcr it appeared. He had never told Burns that he had Jiepji offered Jl"0.nno to leave the state, as he had received no such offer. Mr. Whiteside said that he had not received re-ceived any money for his part in the senatorial investigation, but that he was in debt to the extent of several thousand dollars. Mr. Conrad had offered of-fered him money in his legislative campaign, cam-paign, but he had not accepted it. In reply to questions from Mr. Foster, Fos-ter, Mr. Whiteside said he had paid his own expenses in this investigation, amounting to about $2,000, and that he bad received but $50 from any other source. Mr. Campbell had loaned him that amount. The sub-committee on the papers in Mr. Kurtz's and Mr. Seller's hands, having completed its work and reported report-ed that certain of the documents should be examined, these gentlemen were then recalled and the accounts put in. All of them related to members of the legislature, and were as follows: By Mr. Kurtz. Stephen Bywater, 15 000- deposited March 3, 1899. F. C. Day $5 000: deposited March 3. 1S99. Michael' Shovlin, $S.500, deposited March 20, m9. L. -C. Parker, two certificates cer-tificates of deposit. $1,000 each. February, Febru-ary, 1S99. W. E. Tierney, certificate of deposit. $14,253. May. 1S99. By Mr Feller. J. L. Jacqueth. two deposits aggregating S9.SG0, in drafts from the United States treasury. J. II. Gieger. various memoranda after April 12, 1S99. including a certificate of de- j posit Mav 13. 1S99. j Mr. Kurtz explained that the Tierney deposit was connected with the opening open-ing of the State Bank of Townr.end, and that the money had been collected from various quarters. Representative Stephen Bywater of Flathead county, being called, said that he had deposited the $15,000 shown by the accounts of the Bank of Montana, Mon-tana, as exhibited by Cashier Kurtz. He said that he had brought $6,000 in currency with him when he came to Helena, and had kept it in his trunk during the sixty days preceding. The other $9,000 did not belong to him, but had been handed to him by his brother. Quito a large part of these two sums was in $500 bills. Mr. Bywater said that he was a railroad rail-road conductor with a salary of $125 per month: that he had saved some of the $6,000 from his salary, and had sold cattle and mining: stock for the remainder. re-mainder. He had also bought a ranch j ior n.niu in ijjiii, Mr. Bywater said that his brother lived in the state of Washington, and had brought him $9,000 with which to pay for stock in the Croton Mining company of British Columbia. The brother had remained in Helena for twenty-four hours, but the witness said he did not know where he. had stopped. Asked what he had paid for the property. prop-erty. Mr. Bywater said that he was one of Vhe original locators of the mines owned by the company, and that the cost to him had been $200 or S.100. He had used the monev for the development develop-ment of the property. On oross-oxaminn.tion. Mr. Byw'ater said that he was a Republican, that he had voted with the Republican caucus, and that he had not received any money for his vote for Clark. Speaking independently, Mr. Bywater said that Whiteside told him he could get $5,000 for his vote for Mr. Clark, but ha had told him he would not take it. and after that had warned people peo-ple against Whiteside. Washington. Feb. 28. Congressman Campbell, principal counsel for the prosecution in the Clark case, was on i the stand during the greater part of the day before the-senate committee on elections. He said that while he had I attended the primary conference of friend's of Mr. Clark, which resulted in the anti-Daly campaign, he had not heard much of the talk, having gone to sleep. He had given the Clark people peo-ple no formal notice when he decided to discontinue his allegiance to Mr. Clark, and he did not become unfriendly unfriend-ly to Mr. Clark until he became dissatisfied dis-satisfied with his campaign methods. He emphatically denied Ben Hill's statement that he (Campbell) had opened the Bickford letter bearing upon the prosecution of Mr. Whiteside, but confessed that, he had advised Hill to op-en it, saying that he felt it to be so important to Whiteside to protect him from an unjust prosecution that he would have advised the course even if he had been familiar with the penal statutes, which he was not. Mont., was recalled. His testimony was to the effect that Representative By-water By-water had had a large package of money containing between $6,000 and $7,000 in the safe in his (Peeler's) bank and had taken it out previous to leaving leav-ing for Helena to attend the sitting of the legislature. He was called by the defense to. explain ex-plain By water's possession of the $6,000 which he said he had taken to Helena with him and kept in his trunk during the legislative session. He had seen Bywater put a $500 bill in the package on at least two occasions. When Peeler concluded, the Hon. Andrew An-drew J. Campbell asked to be sworn, stating that he took the stand of his own volition. He is the Montana member mem-ber of the house of representatives and is the senior counsel for the prosecution. prosecu-tion. Mr. Campbell first related his connection con-nection with Thomas E. Lyons, one of the witnesses for the defense. He said that Lyons came to him, saying that he had a story to tell, but that he wanted $5,000 for testifying before the state supreme court or the senate committee. com-mittee. Campbell said he told Lyons that he could not pay him for testifying, testify-ing, but that he would pay him for his work in looking up corroborative tes- t imnn v Lyons had told him after that that he had made a deal with the Clark people peo-ple by which they secured the votes of the Jefferson county delegation, including in-cluding Senator Warren and Representatives Repre-sentatives Luddy and Hill. Campbell said he had advised Lyons not to testify in the Wellcome disbarment disbar-ment case, believing that if he should go before the supreme court and relate his participation in the bribery of members of the legislature he would be disbarred dis-barred immediately. After coming to Washington, Campbell Camp-bell said, he had learned that Lyons had made an affidavit saying that Campbell had offered him $5,000 to commit perjury. per-jury. He had met Lyons after the latter lat-ter came to Washington, and said Lyons had again urged him to put . up $5,000. "but I told him I could not," continued con-tinued the witness. "I don't know,'.' he added, "but that I did say that if I should do such a thing it would be th ruination of me. I certainly did not want to put myself in the power of such a man, while I was at the same time anxious to secure his testimony if that could be honorably done." Campbell also related in detail his connection with Ben Hill, telling how the latter had come to his office and volunteered to relate his experiences aS -A Worker fiW.PIarlr eomnkH ,- ; J he had made no suggestion as to any statement that should be put in the affidavit. af-fidavit. Hill had complained, he said, that the Clark people had treated him badly and asked him for money. He had then given Hill $100 and told him that he would pay him for other service serv-ice in collecting testimony. 1 Hill had given him much information and "I realized then, as I realize now, that if you want to find out what is in the mud you have to wade in the mud." In this connection, .Campbell told of having Hill investigate the effort . to implicate Whiteside through Ben Falk in the effort to get access to the returns re-turns in the legislative election. He told of opening Bickford'e letter in his (Whiteside's) office, but instead of ad-n-nttmg, as Hill had testified, that he (Campbell) had opened the letter, he said that Hill himself opened it. Explaining the payment of money to the Missoula witnesses, Wright and Minshall, Campbell said it had been given to the men by his private secre tary, without his (Campbell's) knowledge. knowl-edge. He had paid the draft and reproved re-proved his secretary. He had recognized that the men could not be used as witnesses and had clearly clear-ly seen the error of the step, but with i the explanation made, he was willing to accept all responsibility for the act. Campbell said he had not made the alterations in the copy of Hill's affidavit I exhibited here, nor had he asked Hill to destroy the affidavit. In response to an inquiry from Senator Pettue, Campbell related the" particulars regarding re-garding his attendance at the meeting I of Senator Clark's friends at the lat-! lat-! ter's office at the beginning of the cam-l cam-l paign. He said.he was invited by Clark j to attend the meeting, and had come in response to this request. He had, however, gone to sleep during the meet-I meet-I ing, and knew little of what took place. Soon afterwards he had told Mr. Mc-I Mc-I Deriraott that he did not desire to enter 1 the campaign. Previous to that time the" had been opposed to the Daly fac-! fac-! tion. His reason for withdrawing from j the Clark campaign wa that he did not wish to enter a boeJle campaign, j "which I was then satisfied that cam-I cam-I paign was to be," he said. I "Did you not realize it was to be a boodle campaign when you attended the j meeting?" asked Senator Caffery. i "I did." "Why did you not then withdraw?" "I can hardly say why, but after thinking it over I concluded I did not 1 want to go into the fight. I notified j Mr. McDermott three or four weeks after the meeting." j Senator Caffery then asked Camp- j bell why he had undertaken the prosecution prose-cution of the case, to which the witness , replied: "Wihen the campaign was opened, and 1 after I had been nominated for con- j gress, I took no part in the factional controversv. "On Dec. 15 Whiteside, who had been elected to the state senate, came to me and told me that it was his intention to expose bribery if any was discovered discover-ed in connection with the senatorial contest, and as I had been his attorney, j asked my counsel. I told him if he j entered upon such an undertaking he should be careful not to let the entire i responsibility rest upon his own ahoul- j deie. "When the legislature met I was summoned to Helena by Whiteside. I wciil mere aau i tnnainu win, a"" until un-til the exposure, giving h.m from time to time such advice as I could in 'his proceeding. "Then 1 went home, intending to have no more to do with the matter. After that Clark's friends and the public press of the state, influenced, as I believe, be-lieve, by money, began an attack upon me. making t'he direct charge that I had been guilty of putting up the, money used in that exposure. I immediately imme-diately went back tu Helena, determined deter-mined to make the best fight I could, and to fitav in it to the finish." With Campbell still on the stand. th committee took its usual noon receas. At the opening of the afternoon session, ses-sion, Mr. Campbell again referred to his attendance upon the Clark conference, confer-ence, saying that he had given no attention at-tention to the discussion of money matters, mat-ters, and knew nothing of the financial affairs of the committee. He had not given formal notice of the severance of his relations with the Clark people. He said the first business he had ever had for Mr. Daly was in September. Septem-ber. 189S. He had then been engaged in one transaction, and last June had been regularly employed as attorney by the Washoe Copper Mining company, com-pany, in which Mr. Daly is interested. Crose-examined by Mr. Faulkner, Mr. Campbell said tliat he had made one trip in the campaign entirely in behalf , of the Clark committee, and only one; He had looked after some matters for the committee on trips he had made on other business. "Were you paid by C."W. Clark for your services on these trips?" "I was not. Mr. Clark wrote me, asking me to keep an aecount of my expenses, and saying he would pay me $15 a day for my services. I did not, j however, accept anything, and was not paid." ' Up to the date of the convention he was as friendly to Mr. Clark as he ever had been. "I challenge any man to say that I indicated any hostility to Mr. Clark during the campaign," he added. " ' ' He had been placed in nominartion by a supporter of (Hark. He had, however, how-ever, previous to the election, told Mr. -eiu ne ieit line never again giving Clark his support. Mr. Faulkner questioned Mr. Campbell Camp-bell sharply about the letter from Mr. Bickford which had been intercepted in his office. "Are you certain you did not open the letter?" "I am juat as certain as that I am here." "You did not hesitate io advise him to open the letter?" "I did not." "And if he had pot opened the letter you would -have done o?" "I presume I would, if there had been no other means of getting at the contents con-tents of the letter." "Are you familiar with the penal statutes on the question of opening other people's letters?" "I don't know that I am." Mr. Faulkner read the law making it a misdemeanor to open mail belonging belong-ing to others, and Mr. Campbell added: "I did not know about the statute at the time, but if I had known about it I should not have hesitated to open the letter to shield Mr. Whiteside, when I knew there was a scheme on foot to send him to the penitentiary on a charge of which he was not guilty." Mr. Campbell was on the stand. when the committee adjourned for the day. |