The Topeka state journal., 1908-09-24
ANSWERS BRYAN.
Continued from Page one.)
Wanton aud InexcusabIe.

CONTINUED from Page One.)
Wanton and Inexcusable.
1 call your attention to the fact that
the question is not whether or not the
judge, erred, or whether the Injunction
was proper. The point is that the gov
ernor was alert to take out OF the
hands of the attorney general what the
attorney general felt was his sworn
duty to prevent, an alleged instance OF
the breaking of the laws by this par
ticufar great. corporation AS Tar as l
have seen, Governor Haskell has not
even attempted a thing which can be
called a defense of this action OF his.
1t thus appears that his action was as
inexcuSable as it was wanton, except
on the theory that in defance OF the
attorney generals statements and at
all hazards he intended for some rea-
son of his own to protect the interests
of a great corporation against the law.
1t has been suggested on his be-
half that, after all he d1d not Ia
vor the Standard Oil. but merely the
Prairie Oil and Gas company This
claim is disposed of by the testimony
of the Standard Oil itself. taken m
the latter part of. 1900. in the, new suit
now pending before the United States
court at St Louis against the Stand
ard Oil. In this testimony the stand
ard Oil upon being required by the
government to put in list of all
in which it's subsidiary companies held
stock. reported among the others the
Prairie Oil and Gas company, total
capital $10,00e, 900, of which the Ma
tionaI Transit company's proportion
was $9.999, 500; and furthermore it
appears that the National Transit
company had a capital stock OF $25,-
455.200, of which the Standard Oil
company owned $25, ,451,6JO. In
other words the Prairie Oil and Gas
Q =
by the National Transit company and
this National Transit company was
owned, all except about $3.50, by
the Standard. Now contrast your ac-
ton in this case of Governor Has
kefE with Mr.. Taft's action as regards
Senator Foraker, as set forth in his
letter of July 20. 1907, which quoted
in my statement. 1t was matter of
common notoriety" about Senator
Foraker. as it has long been Il mat
ter of common notoriety about Gov
crnor Haskell, that he was the de-
fender and supporter of certain cor
porate interests and therefore hostile
to the policies for which the ad-
miniStration stood. There was no
such convincing proof against Sena
tor Foraker at that time, however. as
there was against Governor Haskell,
when, as you say he was, with your
approval, made treasurer of your
campaign committee.
F'Orakcr-s Case.
But Mr.. Taft has refused to be a
party to the denomination of Senator
Foraker, even though it was represent
ed that only thus could he advance his
own interests, showing by actual deeds
and that his words We're true, when he
said, 1 do not care for the presidency if
it has to come by compromise with any
one on a matter of principle
with a hundred fold clearer evil
dence before you as to the connection
of Governor Haskeil with the STANDARD
Oil than Mr.. Taft as to the connection
of Foraker with any corporation. you
nevertheless secured Governor Haskell
as chairman of the committee to write
the platform on which you stand and
put him in as treasurer Of your COM
mittee.
Let me add that Governor Haskell's
utter unfitness for any public position
of trust, or for arbitration with any
man anxious to make an appeal on
moral issue to the American people has
been abundantly shown wholly ire
spectfve OF this action of his in connec<
tion with the Standard Oil interest. AS
an American citizen Who prizes his
Americanism and his citizenship. I re-
gard ii as a scandal and a disgrace
that Governor Haskell should be con-
nected with the manasement of any
national committee. I have not the
space in this letter to discuss Governor
HaskelPs conduct, for instance, in
vetoing the child labor bill, or the fact
that his name appears as one of the
in various suits brought by
the government to prevent the Creek
Indians from having certain of their
lands fraudulently taken; or his con-
nection with the various other matters
of the kind; but let me call your at
tention to his conduct in prostituting
to base purposes the state universtty'
as set forth in an article in the Out
look of September 5, last, under the
heading of Shall the People Rule in
OkIahoma?' In this article you Will see
that Governor Haskell was given full
to make every explanation
and that he made none. After setting
kelPs conduct. the Outlook article con-
cludes as follows:
Quotes the Outlook.
ION this state of affairs we have
two comments to make and two ques-
tions to ask.
'' The people of Oklahoma are taxed
to support their educational institutions
from the primary school to the uniVer-
sity. They pay their money to have
their children educated. When the pol
iticians use this money to promote the
interest of a political machine or
church sect. they are guilty of
breach of trust. What do the taxpay-
ers of Oklahoma think of the use which
their public servants are making of the
public funds? What do they think
about this financial policy-the taking
of the money due their sons and daugh-
ters and diverting it for the benefit of
politicians. ecclesiastical and civil?
Governor Haskell was one of Mr..
Bryan's right hand men in the Demo-
cratic convention and at Mr.. Bryan
instance has been made treasurer or
the Democratic national committee. 1t
is appalling to think what would be the
result in the educational systems of the
Philippines and Porto Rico, in the dig
ging of the Panama canal, in the work