Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1908-10-02
your position on the trust question with
Campaian Contribution.


fund with which the committee con-
Quoted the campaign. I am not sure
about the figures, because have moi
seen an authentic statement Of the con-
tributions, but was informed that the
largest of the two sums which you
mention, was not all contributed by the
man to whom 1t was credited, but in
cluded contributions from others as
we'll as that which he gave himself
But If you want to be fair why do you
not give the amount Of the Republican
campaign fund that year and the
sources of 1t? I am willing to have
both funds published; are you? II
some Of those who contributed to our
fund Of less than 100000 had a pecu-
mary interest in the result Of the cleo
ton, how will you explain the enor-
nous contributions to the Republican
fund? If you will remember, the DEM
ocratic platform candidly declares the
party's purpose. If the carrying out
Of that policy would have been Of ad-
vantage to any one, the whole public
had knowledge and the publication of
the contributions would not have af-
fected the result. Publicity as to cam
paign funds is not needed to make
known that which is disclosed by the
platform, but to direct attention to Sc
cret agreements, expressed or implied,
which would otherwise be concealed
from the public. You certainly pay
more attention to the mote than to the
beam when you find fault with our ma
tional campaign fund Of 1896 and ig-
more the significance Of fund almost
as large, which at your request was
collected from a few persons In 1904
and was used in one state and was only
a small item in the fund collected that
year.
Accusation Against Voters.
But your letter presents a defense
of your partys position and an accu-
sation against the voters which en-
phasizes an issue already prominent
You are the first conspicuous member
of your party to attempt an explana-
ton Of the party's opposition to pub
licity before the election, and the ad-
mission which you make will embar-
rass your party associates. Your po-
.sition is that the publication before
election Of the contributions made to
your compaign funds would furnish
your political opponents an opportuni-
ty to give false impression as to the
fitness of the candidates. You cite as
illustrations the contributions made to
Governor Hughes campaign fund, the
contribution collected by Mr.. Hartman
and the contributions which are now
being collected for Mr.. Taft's cam
paign fund. You charge, In effect that
the people are so lacking in intelli-
gence that they might condemn as i'm
proper contributions which you declare
to be proper. If the voters differ from
you on this question, are they neces-
sarily ignorant and wrong? Must the
members Of the party organization act
as self-appointed guardians of the peo-
pie and conceal from them what Is go
ing on, lest the people be misled as to
the purpose and effect Of large contri-
buttons. Is this your explanation OF
the action of the Republican leaders In
the national convention in voting down
a publicity plank? If you will pardon
the suggestion, believe that better
explanation can be found in holy writ,
for do we not read Of men loving dark
ness rather than light, because their
deeds are evil?
Not a Personal Question.
You attempt to make a personal
question Of it and ask whether any
one will accuse such men as you, Gov
ernor Hughes and Mr.. Taft Of being in
fiuenced by contributions. That is not
the question. If it Is found that
party to a suit has given sum of
money to one Of the jurors, the court
does not stop to inquire whether or not
the juror Is an incorruptible man or
whether in accepting the money he ex-
plicitly stated that it was accepted with
the understanding that he was under
no obligations to consider 1t in making
up his verdict. The court would hold
that the giving Of the money by an In
terested party or the receiving of mon
ey was a contempt Of court and an In
reference with the administration OF
Justice. Public officials occupy much
the same position as jurors. They are
constantly called upon to decide ques-
tions between the favor seeking cor
porations on the one hand and the
people on the other and there Is very
general impression that officials OF
these favor seeking corporations do not
put up large sums Of money from
purely patriotic motives. Mr.. Have
myer testified before a senate COM
mittee some years ago that the sugar
trust made it business to contribute
to campaign funds and that it was It's
custom to give to the party in power
in the state.
81 do not mean to say that Mr..
Hughes was influenced by the contri-
buttons made to him by the trust mag
mates whose names were given in the
after election report. l do not mean
to say that you were Influenced by the
contributions collected by Mr.. Harri-
man, neither do l mean to say that
Mr. Taft will be influenced by the con-
tributions that are being made to his
fund by the trust magnates; but l do
mean to say that the American people
have a right to know what contribu-
tions are being made, that they may
Judge for themselves the motive Of the
givers and the obligation imposed upon
those who receive. The reflection upon
the people involved in your charge that
they would misuse the knowledge which
publicity would give, is unworthy OF
one who has been elevated to so high
an office by the votes Of the people,
and venture the assertion that you
cannot procure from Mr.. Taft an en-
dorsement of your defense. He Is now