The Grenada sentinel. [volume] (Grenada, Miss.) 1868-1955, 1908-11-14
PEOPLE MUST KNOW
LIGHT ON PANAMA CANAL DEAL
is DEMANDED.
Records in Possession Of the Govern
ment Alone Can Clear Up Scan
dial Which Soon Will Become
National Disgrace.

The Chicago Journal says that 1t Il
well known that somebody Dough
the stock of the defunct French Pana
ma Canal Company for $12, 900 o.
9 s and sold it to the United States
government for $4,000, 000." And the
Chicago paper declares further that i
Is not now known to anybody out
side the gang Of spectators thai
reaped a rich harvest by playing on
the patriotism Of the American PEG
pie, how much of that $28,000,00(
Went into the pockets of President
Roosevelt's intimate friends, who pro
NOTED the DEAL" 1t has been said on
what seems to be good authority that
the governments check for 100000 0(
was paid to ]. Pierpont Morgan. But
no one knows how the sum was di
vided. Charles P. Taft has denied
is the only person who has made a
denial. We have seen nc word from
Douglas Robinson, a brOther-in-law OF
the president. Yet he has, at least
through rumor, been connected with
the transaction.
We do not think, however, that any
denial, no matter how vehemently it
may be made, ought to be accepted as
conclusive. For all the records are
In the possession and under the con-
troll of the government. The appeal is
to them. MIR. Cromwell, no doubt,
knows who got the money. Possibly
Mr.. Morgan is not wholly ignorant of
the details of the negotiation. AS
long as the facts are thus suppressed,
the people cannot be blamed for u
pecting the worst. They remember
the close relation Of u government
to the inspired revolution in Panama,
which resulted in u getting control
of the canal strip. They remember
the sudden turning from the Nicara-
qua to the Panama route, and this in
recommended the Nicaragua route.
These two events beyond question
greatly increased the value of the
stock Of the Panama company. And
now, when we hear that an American
syndicate was the chief beneficiary of
the change of plans, and of the made
to-order revolution, the people natur-
ally feel that they are entitled to an
explanation.
When all the documents. in a case
are in the possession of men charged
with or suspected of improper action.
or in the possession of their friends,
the duty of such men is of course per
fectly clear. They must make the
documents public. A failure or a re-
fusal to do so is equivalent to some
thing very like a confession. AS We
have said, mere denials will not serve
when the men who make them refuse
to produce the evidence which would
support them, that evidence being in
to deny the case is of course still
stronger against them. All the papers
and accounts of the French company
passed to this government when it
the property. The facts
can be had from the government and
Illc SONClIllCLlJ dlOhO. wv IAAAh SAO
people are entitled to them, and be-
fore the election, too. Men who have
in their possession evidence which
prove or disprove a certain al
legation, and who refuse to produce it,
cannot complain if their refusal is
construed as proof of their unwilling
ness to have the truth known. That
Is both sound morals and sound law.
We know that the American govern
paid $40, 900, 900 for the property
Of the French company. To whom was
money paid? That is the ques-
ton that must be answered. We
think further that the American peO-
pie, without distinction of party,
ought to demand the facts In their
completeness. They do not mean to
or even, to suspect any one
1njustly-do not indeed want to
hing evil of any one But what are
hey to do in a case like this? They
that there is in existence an
of evidence to disprove all
charges, and that evidence has so far
been withheld from them. Why is it
u;tbbold 2-Tndiana DOIiS .NawS |