Bisbee daily review., 1908-10-11
AFTER THEODORE ROOSEVELT

AFTER THEODORE ROOSEVELT.
 The New York Sun. a Republican paper and an ardent supporter of w. H. Taft. has this to say of President Roosevelt:
 MT Roosevelts attack on Mir. Ol- ney in his last reply to Mr. Bryan is characteristically' unfair and equally unwisc
 We would prefer in charity to as- sums that Mir. Roosevelt in this attack upon Mir. olney wrote more in agnor- anee than in cummings, but to do so is to impute to Mir. Roosevelt a snort ness of memory which staggers credu- lity. Mir. Roosevelt has time and again in his non-official communion tons claimed credit for himself and par tT in having introduced tEis amendment which made shippers liable to indict- ment for accepting rebates. Unless his memory has suffered a total paral- ysis he must have kDown when he wrote his reply to Mir. Bryan that the law for whose existence he has loudly claimed credit was not passed Umil after the last Democratic administra- tion had ended. The fact is that in this as in most of his controversies Mir. Roosevelt has shown a shameless disregard of truth and fair reasoning MT. Bryan. who with all his economic vagaries has shown himself in the con troyersy to be a gentleman and to have some distant respect for trutI. will soon find that 1t is impossible to continue a dispute with an anta gOnist who resorts for his facts to his imagi- nation and whose insistent advocacy of the square deaT' is a monumental | hypocrisy of American history. ITO show the difference between { deeds and words was Mir. RoosevElt's | excuse for this waDtorr and unfair at 1 tack upon the memory of the former president so recently deceased and
 whose lips are silenced against this l gratuitous attack"
 The New York World. independent, 1 hands this to the president: | As we understand Mir. Roosevelt's s i defense of the Hartman campaign 1 contribution
 | l. It was entirely proper for Alr.
 Roosevelt to solicit this money. be cause he intended to bunco Hartman
 and did bunco him.
 9 Secrecy was unnecessary. be. cause MT. Roosevelt's motives might {; have been misconstrued by low. minded persons who would see in the 1 transaction sordid attempt on the part of Hartman to control the pTesi dency through the use of tainted
 money.
 2. Publicity of such a contribution before election might have thwarted the high moral purpose of Mir. ROose- welt in separating Hartman from his money without giving him anything 1 in return.
 i. Other presidential candidates i should never be permitted to engage
 in similar negotiations because even
 were they sufficiently patriotic to re pudiate the moral obligation they
 would rot be sufficiently practical tC ' deceive 2 man like Hartman. ! ,. The fact that it was Theodore
 Roosevelt who did this is a complete
 answer to all hostile questions.
 Having defended the contribution fperhaps Mr. Roosevelt will now eX
 pIain just how the money was used
 as Hartman said, to turn 50,000 votes in th, election.-El Paso Times. HOW PROGRESS IS MARCHING 4 number of amendments to the | constitution of the state will be sub mitted to the voters of California next mcnth. It is within the province oi the legislature to submit constitution al amendments. but they cannot be come part of the organic law of tbS stat until they have received the ep Preyai Of the people at the polls.
 Not enc of the cave-dwellers whe i fGssilize and petrify in feactionary gloom. mourning t5e flight of the gocc old constructive days when he swung | from bougi to bough, thinks of finding [ peevigh fault with that requirement. Yet. in its last analysis. the proceed ! ing is nothing more than the applica l ton of the referendum If the yoters Of 9 state are competent to pass judg
 ment directly on changes proposed tt
 be made in the constitution of the state. they are competent to pass i judgment on changes proposed to bs
 made in the code of the state. Tht greater ability includes the less
 power.