The San Francisco call., 1905-06-21
EX-DIPL OMAT rs SCA THINGLY
ARRAIGNED BY MR.. ROOSEVELT
Of Attacks Upon His Subeyzors
Is Declared to Haze Become
lNonomunla With Him.
LETTERS TO SECRETARY TAFT
ARE BEGUN WITH "DEAR BILL

the documents as lOlloWS. L MI NUS
sell, now Minister to Colombia, through
the influence of Mr.. Loomis' (which state
ment incidentally is untruel. Mr.. Bowen
again says: Mr.. Loomis collected the
Mercado claim from the Venezuelan Gov
ernment got share of 1T for a small
sum and never reported the case to the
Department of State And again he
says: He dealt with Buchanan, whom
Loomis subsequently got appointed Min
lister to Panama (Which is again an un-
TRUTH. Mr.. Loomis had nothing what
ever to do with the appointment of either
Mr.. Buchanan or Mr.. Russell.
In Mr.. Bowen's statement. dated at
East Orange, May 10, he says: I have
never preferred charges against Mr..
Loomis.' Three lines further down he
says that, to his mind it has been proved
conclusively that Mr.. Loomis is a dis
honest official and few lines. further
down says that he had not preferred
charges against Mr.. Loonis and that
none were needed The documents them
selves were charges, evidence and
proofs sssss>4r
The documents. Mr.. Bowen explains,
were submitted to Mr.. Hay in the spring
of 1904 and that year had passed with
out further action by Mr.. Hay (Which,
by implication at least. looks as if Mr..
Bowen were accusing Mr.. Hay also of
misconducD. In this same communica-
ton of May 10 Mr.. Bowen goes on to say,
that / was justified in so doing (that is.
in securing the publication Of the attack
on Mr.. Loomis). l have but to show how
Mr.. Loomis abrogated the agreement that
President Roosevelt and Mr.. Hay had au-
thorized me to make with the Venezuelan
Government; how he thus ruined our
whole case. and how ne seemed likely
to bring still further disgrace ON our Gov
ernment.'
THAT LOOMS "PROTOCOL."
Mr.. Bowen then goes on to STATE that
after he had received by cable, on jan
uary TO- from Mr.. Hay one telegram of
which he approved. a protocol arrived
by cable from Mr.. Loomis- and that this
protocol, as he calls it, and of which he
complains. he answered by a telegram to
Mr.. Hay. He adds: I was, of course,
even more astounded than the Venezue-
Ian Government was that Mr.. Loomis
should thus destroy my work, and, in
fact, override the decision of President
Roosevelt and Mr.. ~Hay and derogate
from our prestige as a strong and
straight nation And he ends his letter
by the following statement: If the news
papers representatives were influenced
by me I was justified in trying to infiu-
ence them, because Mr.. LOOMS was dis
honest while Minister at Caracas, and as
Assistant Secretary of State was guilty
of abrogating the agreements President
Roosevelt and Mr.. Hay had authorized
me to make with the Venezuelan Gov
ernment, and because he deceived and
seemed likely to continue to deceive the
Government and people of the United
States
'.Ir u disingenuous for Mr.. Bowen re-
peatedly to use such language and at the
same time to insist that he has made no
charges against Mr.. Loomis. Moreover,
It IL quite impossible that Mr.. Bowen can
believe that the telegram signed by Mr..
Loomis - Acting Secretary Of State.
which he calls q protocol. really proves
that Mr.. Loomis was guilty Of 'abrogat-
ing the agreements President Roosevelt
and Mr.. Hay had authorized me to make
with the Venezuelan Government
'.Mr. Bowen's statement IL shown to be
absolutely untrue by the statement Of
the solicitor OF the Department of State.
Mr.. Penfield. But his own statement
bears within itself its own refutation on
this point He shows in this statement
that he answered this cable Of Mr.. Loo
mis- by cable to Mr.. Hay, who would
thus have had his attention specifically
called to the LooMis protocol. even if
he had not known OF it before and even
II he had been SO neglectful of his duty
as not to inquire what cables had been
sent in the matter with which he was
dealing
REALLY A CHARGE AGAINST HAY.
LAS matter of fact the Loomis cable
in question was sent by direction of Mr..
Hay with the assistance of Mr.. Penfeld.
and was signed by Mr.. Loomis simply
because on the day that 1T was sent 1t
happened that Mr.. Hay was confined to
his house, and could not get down to the
State Department 1t is on its face an
absurdity to suppose that Mr.. Hay, who
returned to his duties in the State De-
partment within day or two, and who
was repeatedly going over this whole
Venezuelan matter and cabling to~lMr.
Bowen about it and receiving cables from
him in return, could have been ignorant
of the fact that such cable had been
sent by Loomis during his (Mr. Hays
absence. Mr.. Bowen's allegation on this
point is In reality a charge against Mr..
Hay, rather than against Mr.. Loomis
'4Mr. Bowen furnished his charges
against Mr.. Loomis and some Of the doc
uments In reference thereto to represen-
tatives Of q New York newspaper. The
Continued on Page 2. Column &