The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1908-09-25
Roosevelt's Reply
is Incomplete.

As was to be expected, President
E--soosevelt's reply to Mr. Bryan's de-
tznand for proof of the reckless charges
that he had made against Governor
aHasken was. like most of the presi-
dents positions of similar nature,
nothing more nor less than a pre-
judgment of the case, based on hear
,ssay and exparte evidence, to the entire
exclusion of anything that the defend
ant might be able to say in his own
behalf The New Orleans Times-Dem-
ocrat says of the presidents reply:
The most impressive feature of the
presidents long answer to Mr.. Bryan S
Telegram is his practical admission
that his charge against Gov. HaSkeil
Is based upon hearSay. He speaks OF
Oklahoma executives CLOSE relation
with the Standard Oil interests while
he was in Ohio as a matter of COM
mon notoriety." After making the as
sertion that Mr.. Haskells connection
with the octopus in Oklahoma is a
mater of court record, he virtually
cOntradicts his ogn assertion by citing
the pleadings in the Oklahoma case
upon which he relies, which prove
nothing of the sort.
With Mr. RooseveIt's campaign ar
gument against Haskell and the argU-
ment against Mr.. Bryan that he has
lugged into the discussion. we need
not deal al this time They are prop
erly dismissed as irrelevant. IL was
the president of the United States
who made the direct charge against
Mir. Haskell. 1t was the president or
whom Mr.. Bryan demanded the proof.
With Theodore Roosevelt's personal
opinion of the Oklahoma governor tbe
discussion has nothing TO do. The
words OF the nation chief executive
carry more weight than the words OF
an individual. because of the dignity
that rests with the office and the ven
Grafton in which the high place is
held by the American people. II would
be as improper, we take it, for the
president to convict without proof as
il would be for a federal court to con-
.viet without proof. Nor can the pres
f5dent condemn upon hearSay any more
properly than could a judge upon
ssthe federal bench. Asked for evidence
upon which he bases mis- charge
against Mr. Haskell, the president OF
hfers hearsay evidence, supported by
Inference drawn from the court rec
ords. Not even a petit jury would
bring in a verdict of guilty on such
testimony.
The cases of Foraker and Haskell
are entirely dissimilar- Foraker ad-
/ mits the connection charged. Haskell
denies IL and demands an immediate
investigation. The president pre-
Judges his case. To that Dreluds-
Ament unless it is supported by &C
tusl proof. Mr.. Bryan excerpts. and the
fpresident replies with a political ar
! gument instead of the proof demand
ed The strong inference is that. in
mis- anxiety TO break the force of the
Foraker admission and SuccOr his Der.
sonal candidate for office, Mr., Roose-
welt forgot that he was the nations
chief magistrate and the responsible
ity attaching to the Office. When he
: charge. he failed to answer Mr. Bryan
ESThe episode does not reflect credit
either upon Mr.. Roosevelt's lofty Office
or upon his personal conceptions of IL
II may he that Mr.. Haskell. in or
der to relieve his party of any possible
embarrassment which his presence on
the committee might create while the
charges are being thoroughly sifted.
will resign. But whatever he does.
the bullying part which Mr.. Roosevelt
has PLAYED in the matter Will not in
s3ure Mr. Haskell nor establish his
guilt, until some better evidence Is
offered. II We mistake not, il will re-
act upon the president himself long
before the campaign closes.