Richmond planet., 1908-10-17
RETURNS BIG LOAN.
..washinrton. Fob. 4. !

RETURNS BIG LOAN.
Washington. Feb. 4. 1902.
John ID. Archbold. Esq, PC Broad
way, New York
MY Dear Mr.. Archbold: I very
greatly regret TO have TO inform Won
that the proposed transaction at Co
lumbus has failed: at least for the
present. lt may be revived later,
but / doubt IL ] shall care 20 bother
about IL any more. However that
may be. ! herewith send you. with
many thanks for your kindness I'm the
matter, New York draft for $4,000.
payable TO your order. as repayment
OF the money advanced by you on
the above mentioned account.
Kindly acknowledge the recent
OF the same and oblige. Yours. SC.
y. b. FORAKER.
IF Mr.. Hearst had read these ac-
companying letters, particularly that
from Mr.. ArchbOld Of January 21
and my letter OF February 4. return
ing the money. he would have known
that the certificate OF deposit had no
reference whatever TO the Jones bill
or any other bill. They were near
enough together In point of time.
ana presumably near enough togeth-
or on the files. 20 make IN dfmcult
lor any search for the facts and
truth TO miss them or overlook them
Mr. Hearst stated I'm advance of
MS speech at Columbus that the let
ters had been furnished him NV n
gentleman CD whose name no
would not give for fear the Standard
OIL Company might persecute him.
Perhaps this gentleman did NOT
find these missing letters. Perbarrs
II n found them, he did not furnish
them TO Mr.. Hearst. In any event.
perhaps the omission TO read them
was made because If read they would
nave defeated the object TO be ac-
compiished. However that may be
TINS correspondence surely and con-
clusiveiy disposes Of that matter
CAN'T RECALL OHIO BILLS.
Until now / have not made anv
statement about the letter Mr.. Hearst
read AT Columbus from Mr.. Arch
bold TO me, dated March 9. 1900
calling my attention to two bills in
Iroduced In the Ohio legislature bv
MT. Price. / have delayed saving
anything about this letter because
having no recollection on the subject
nave been trying to ascertain II I
received the letter, what I did with
H. or did on account OF il. I capnct
md any trace of such a letter on NV
MES or OF any answers in nv letter
book. -''ei
Il have not been able TO commun-
icate with Mr.. Price, who introduced
the bills, but he has stated in a public
interview that he abandoned the hills
because Gov. Nash told him thai
senator Hanna and / were both on
posed to the measures. and mat we
reared II might damage President Nc
hlnley in the national camDaign In
which We were then entering II their
passage should be insisted uDon Mr.
Prices statement suggests to nv
mind that, in all probability. re-
terred the letter to Gov. Nash. ii
DO not know Of any other way. If I |
ever received il. to account for its
absence from my flies, which are
carefully kept Such a disposition OF
the letter would be in accordance
win what is usually done with all
such communications.
In any event, I know that took
no action with respect to 1t. nor on
my own motion with respect to any
Other bin pending in the Ohio Iegis-
Iature at that time or at any other
time since / became a member OF the
Senate, March 4, 1897.
In no instance since that date
nave | sought in any way to influ-
ence legislation at Columbus. excent
wnen applied to for my opinion bv
some member, as has happened a
Few times, and never before March
4, 1897. except only by arguments
before open meetings OF the regular
committees.
While 1 have occasionally heard
from Mr. Archbold during the period
tnat has elapsed since the terroina-