The San Francisco call., 1908-09-28

already mentioned as contributed to
your campaign of 1896. but in my Judg-
plent the amount contributed has MOTH
ing whatever TO do with the point at
issue.
MOTIVE Is QUESTIONED
The question was. for instance,
whether Mr. Clark OF Montana, when he
contributed heavily TO your campaign
your actions would or would not nave
been Influenced properly or improperly
by that contribution, and the same
question applies TO Mr.. Hughes and to
me. In the case of Mr%aH Hughes and
myself the answer is fortunately easy.
You have nothing TO do but examine
our records in the offices TO which we
were both elected You neither knew
or ought 10 have known before writing
that in not one instance has Mr.. Hughes.
as governor. done one thing of any kind.
sort or description for any one of the
contributors you mentioned, or for any
other contributor TO his fund which
ought not TO have been done, and
would not have been done II no con-
tribution had been made. Yet you
clearly imply that he is and has been
improperly Influenced by the fact OF
these contributions having been made
Do you consider such an implication
either straightforward or sincere?
SQUARE DEAL PROMISED
In a letter to the chairman of my
campaign committee on October 20, 1904,
1 specifically approved of the conditions
under which the national committee
was accepting contributions, saying
that their acceptance was TO be with
the explicit understanding that they
were given and received with no
thought Of any more obligation on the
part OF the national committee or OF
the national administration than is i'm
piled in the statement that every man
shall receive a sQuars deal, no more
and no less, and this shall guaran-
tee him in any event TO the best OF my
b
If they subscribe for the purpose Of
securing such national welfare and
with no thought of personal fayors to
them. why they are saeting as Is en-
tirely proper.
continued: IN returning the
money 10 them tany contributors) 1
wish il made clear that there is not
the slightest personal feeling against
them and that they can count upon
being treated exactly as well by the
administration, exactly as fairly as If
we had accepted the contributions.
They shall not suffer in any way be-
cause we refused them. just as they
would not have gained IN any way il
We had accepted them
No member OF the naIionzI committee
has ever directly or indirectly sug-
gested TO me that 1 should either do or
leave Undone anything whatever be-
cause any one had contributed or had
failed 10 contribute.
BRYAN CONDEMNS HIMSELF
These are the facts. Now for your
proposal. You have yourself furnished
its condemnation. You have quoted
the subscriptions furnished to Governor
Hughes as reason TO distrust Governor
Hughes attitude toward corporations,
and / am obliged to say that this can
not be sincere on your part, for you
know well what the governors atti-
Iude has been throughout his term.
You quote the subscription of Mr.
Hartman to my campaign, although
you know well that il does not inter
fere with any action taken by me as
against Mr.. Hartman. and ask If it
would not have affected the campaign
II known. Thereby you have furnished
an excellent reason for refusing 10
meet your proposal, for you make IL
evident that to adopt your proposal
would give to every man who cared
merely for partisan success the chance.
by precisely the argument you have
now made, to create to more purpose
the false impression that you are now
seeking TO create.
Mr. Taft's reputation Mr.. Tafts acts
on the bench and in the executive
service show that he could not be
swayed in any shape or way by any
consideration save the public interest
and that the fact of any man con-
trlbu1ing or failing TO contribute would
in any way influence his action any
more than it has Influenced my action
or the action of Governor Hughes.
emphatically approve of the publi-
cation of campaign expenses after the
election, whether provided for by law
or not.
FALSE IMPRESSION ATTEMPTED
+ You have shown by this letter of
yours that If the contributions TO Mr.
Hughes campaign fund had been made
publlc before election you and those
who act with you would have striven
10 give the false Impression that Mr.
Hughes was unfit to be intrusted with
the position of governor; and you have
shown by this letter of yours that if
Mr. Harrlmans contribution TO the
campaign fund of 1904 (and incidentally
may mention that / am informed
that this particular contribution was
not used for the national campaign,
but in the New York state campaign)
had been known before election. you
and your supporters would have en-
deavOred To- use the fact of its having
been made as an insincere and untruth~
ful argument TO show that I could not
be trusted 10 deal out exact justice TO
Alr. Hartman. No stronger argument
against your proposition has yet been
advanced than this that you have un-
consciously advanced
HASKELL's CASE CONSIDERED
I now come to the important part of
your letter, your attitude toward Mr.
Haskell. You state that Mr. Haskell
has voluntarily resigned from the COM
mittee- You speak highly of the public
service which he has rendered and pro-
test against any condemnation of him
except such as may come in court Out
OF your own mouth you are condemned.
1OI thereby set up that standard of
law honesty which has been the bane
Of this people in endeavoring to get
equity and fair dealings they should
obtain among high minded men-from
great business corporations and from
individuals like Mr.. Haskell
Apparently you disclaim even asking
Mr. Haskell 10 retire from the position
in which you placed him. so that he
retires OF his own free will. and YOU
utter no word of condemnation of his
gross offeIises against public decency
and honesty. On the contrary you
strive to make ii appear that his mis-,
conduct in reference TO the Standard oil
company is all of which he is accused:
whereas. shameless though this par
ticular act of his is. il is no worse
than countless others in his career
/ contrast your action in this case
with that of Mr. Taft in reference to
Senator Foraker Mr. Taft's statement
when the question of his nominal ton
was at stake was that he would rather
not accept il at the price of sacrificing
principle by supporting Mr.. Foraker
for senator. You do not venture in so
much as the slightest possible manner
to censure Mr.. Haskell for his mani
tested misdeeds; and you ask that he
be held guilfless of them unless con-
victed in a court of law, although you
well know that as regards the worst
Of them no action in a court of law
would lie.
wILLFUL IGNORANCE CHARGED