The Washington times., 1905-06-22

The correspondence that passed be-
tween the President and Attorney Cen
eral Moody; the President and Secretary
Morton, and the Attorney General and
Special Attorneys Judson and Harmon,
which tells the story of the resignation
of the two attorneys and the reason
therefor, and makes plain the views Of
the President as to the connection Sec
retary Morton had with the declaration
of rebates by the Santa Fe railroad, was
made public yesterday afternoon.
This correspondence shows that the
President is Of the opinion that the fact
that Mr.. Morton is Cabinet officer
should not weigh for or against him. II
should neither cause him to be singled
out for prosecution nor cause him to be
excused. After going into the matter
thoroughly and corresponding directly
with Secretary Merton, the President
completely exonerates his retiring Cabi-
net officer from any blame In connection
with the Santa Fe matter He also
praises Attorney General Moody for the
stand he took in refusing TO allow the
officers of the Santa Fe to be dragged
into the case.
Position of Attorneys.
Messrs. Judson and Harmon is made
equally clear. In their letters to the
Attorney General they declare they can
do nothing in the Santa Fe cases unless
they are allowed to proceed against the
officers Of that compan~ who were re-
sponsible for the orders to give rebates
to the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company.
When the Department Of Justice de-
clined TO sanction such course of pro-
cedure. which would have involved Sec
retary Morton, Messrs Judson and Har-
mon rendered their designations and
asked to be relieved from further con-
nection with the ce.ses.
Chief in interest In the correspond
ence is the letter written by President
Roosevelt TO the Attorney General on
June IL. the day before the resigna-
tions OF Harmon and Judson were ac-
cepted. The letter reads, In part, as
follows:
Suit Not Justified.
In my opinion, you would be wholly
without justification in proceeding indi.
yfdually against the officers of the
Atchlson, Topeka and Santa Fe Rail
way for contempt when neither the In
terstate Commerce Commission nor the
developed z. single fact of any kind
beyond the holding of their Offices tend.
ing 10 implicate any one of these
officers.
"O--e of the officers, Mr. Morton, is g
member of my Cabinet This fact is
not to be allowed to shield him. nor
on the 9th r hand. is it to be allowed
TO cause hin to be singled out, or the
wi uhn ha lie g.
be singled out. for attack
.'At about the same time that the in.
junction was obtained against the At.
Gibson. Topeka and Santa Fe an injunc
ton was obtained against several Other
Western railroads. Subsequently. i
was developed by the Interstate Com.
merce Commission that under the guist
of division of rates unlawful rebate.
were given by these railroads to the
Internatfora Harvester Company, JUS
as a rebate sfa wen by the Atchisor
in the case or the Colorado Fuel Com
rany.
The Harvester Case
Upon attention being called to tn.
cases by the Interstate Commerce Com
mission the unlawful practice was
abandoned in the Harvester case, as 4
was abandoned In this case Of the Col
orado Fuel Company.
THE two cases stand precisely on a
par. No one has suggested that We
should proceed individually against the
officers of the roads engaged in this
international Harvester Company affair
yet the case is exactly parallel to this
Santa Fe case. There is. of course. nc
possible excuse for discriminating one
case from the other
II have received from Mr.. Morton q
letter in which he not only states that
he had no knowledge of the unIawfu
practice complained Of, but also shows
by the quotation of documents that al
such uniawfuI practices were specificaI.
~ forbidden by him and that the at
tention OF HIS subordinates was repeat
edIy called to che necessity of complying
with the law I'm this respect. Wher
there is thus not cae shadow Of testi
nlony against him. and when whatever
evidence has been submitted shows ex-
plicitly that he is not guilty it seems tc
me that there is no warrant whatever
for our proceeding against him.
Approves Moody's Course.
1.-The course that you have followed In
dealing with all these corporation mat
ters has been coherent and resolute, and
has had my hcartiest approval. The aim
OF the Administration has been In the
first place to.stop the unlawful practices.
We have not proceeded personally
against any of the officers unless there
was legal evidence showing that their
conduct had been wilifuily of such a
nature as to render 1t our duty to try
to punish them personally no less than
to try TO nut an end % the objectionable
practices.
III you at any time get legal evidence
OF any such willful a.1I deliberate viola
ton by any officers of the 1ttchison.
Topeka and Santa Fe of the Injunction
IL the Colorado Fuel case; you VIII, Of
course. proceed as you have already
proceeded in the Chicago beef packing
cases
I'm both this Colorado Fuel case and
ir the International Harvester case
direct that proceedings for contempt
against the companies be taken by the
Government Whether. as the cases
develop. proceedings against individual