Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1906-01-08
Steel TRUST Letters PUBLICA.
ton Offered.
In the Absence of the Real Letters,
the Kansas City Star Offers What
is Suggested by r1r. Corey. n
Strange Moral Attitude Is Sug-
geSted.

Recently it was reported that J. B.
Corey, uncle Of W. Ellis Corey, preeiden,
of the steel trust, has offered under GER
tain conditions to make public letters
said to have been passed between his
nephew, Andrew Carnegie, Mr.. ochwab
and himself. Pending the acceptance ol
the terms of this offer, the Kansas City
Star suggests that the American people
draw on their imagination, adding that
as result OF these surmses one Of these
letters might be as follows:
"My Dear Ellis: Sorry to hear of your
scrape. Still, after my experience you
ought to have known better. Pierpont
and Andrew and young Rockefeller and
Perkins and Rogers were terribly shocked
over my little plunge at Monte Carlo,
though it was my own money and not
plunder made by selling watered stock.
But yon know how scrupulous they are
about everything-especially John, Jr.,
and Rogers. John said he couldn't face
his Bible class until got out. And you
should have heard the quaver in Rogers
voice as he said. Il never expected to
count a gambler among my acquaint-
ances-least OF all at the head Of cor.
poration in which am concerned So
| went. You should have been warned.
Yours ever. CHARLEY"
"Another epistle," according to the
Star. Showing marks OF agitation and
sli1htiy blotted with tears" it may be
believed. reads something like this:
Respected Benefactor, Sir: I am
greatly grieved to know that you take
my little affair SO much to heart. OF
course, | knew that you would never
I have been implicated in such thing.
! Your bent isn't that way. But in busi-
ness l supposed that you and,,Mr. Rogers
and Mr.. Perkins and Mr.. Rockefeller
always went after what You wanted and
got it without regard to ordinary conven.
tonal restrictions. So l had inferred
that we big business men weren't bound
by vulgar morality. Was Rogers in his
Amalgamated Copper deal? Was Per.
kins in his relations to Morgan's bank
and the New York Life? Was Rockefel.
Ter in going after oil competitors 1
really don't see why l should be singled
out as an offender to be punished. Re-
spectfully, ELLIS"
The Star takes it for granted that in
reply to this illumination letter OF this
sort was ndited to show the young maj,
his error:
my Misguided Young Friend: I am
surprised that you should display such
confusion OF thought. Can you not see
that whatever Mr.. Rockefeller or any
other good friends or have done, while
it may have aroused opposition, has al
ways been perfectly respectable and, l
may add in accordance with law as con
strued by the ablest attorne, we could
hire? But yours is disreputable offense.
1t is one OF the first principles of business
to keep within the law. or to have the
law fixed by the legislature or congress.
or to leave no discriminating evidence.
Furthermore, one must always be re-
spectacle. Your ignorance of these prin.
ciples is a great disappointment to me
and, am compelled to say, is ! disqual.
fication for the position you now occupy.
I greatly regret that my training has
been wastsd on one so poorly prepared to
profit by it. Your former well-wisher.
"a. c."