New-York tribune., 1908-09-28


The newspaper clipping goes on TO say that
fudge Priest was-one Of the lawyers ~no lousL- s
Attorney General Hadley in the state ousSe1 -
suit against the Wsters-Peirce and hepnolic -
companies. His legal practice is emery 80 ss
the big corporations and his hrIn ls ~ s-,-tb
the United Railways Company and the NoItn a =.
American interests in ST Louis Judge fIlest 80 -
credited with originating the phrase: =. -
IS a conventional offence which ne ussa % II e.
argument Al the trial of r NJ. Snyder, the Ran"
sas City millionaire. now dead .sai-
You say that tire trust magnales ,s hLo~ TO
cx-u interests and are supporting Juose -
e. far as their interests simply the ll'S
Of the business community. ana espeAClaLs A -. -
the wage workers ! believe they Win S1pt .b
T,,sps Taft So far as they have special lhlsL
azrs which are 10 them more important .a Ia - -
general business welfare oelieNe Lhes ,,,ss "a
go WI, base this belief upon what ha apIeneSU
= 1895 Your success then would, IN my pelIS-,
l,pve been a calamity for the country ~ hoAl -
s-endroir4 OF tie welfare OF the business IneI' q
Ss@-oe-s an6 vvorkingnlen just as. in my oeIlel,
-rour success now would be calaInlN ~
country both from the STANDPOINT .oI r-e
fand especially Of the interests OF ~ ~ 90
-,-o-l-erN and from the standpoint OF Tnorais oLe
= ,-0,,r sr,nnorre-s The New York World IN
Eel3r.srv last printed list of contributions -, -
- - -s- --sy-,Daizn fund OF 1896. containing the
names Of individuals and corporations I ~ i1,Ie
silver mines who made contributions 10 liz &C
gregate amount Of S2SS.eoe one OF s. mes - -
TrihD+3ons heing Of sI5e,000 and anolner u
szs n0A etc Now. all the great nIlallClaI @ Lae
1.-as VINO then contributed 70 your cam
paign fund would have preIeTIeo O-sI- .ss bat,,z
-,eT5fv 10 business adversely. other Inlnss pelns
egusl- but they would rather nave hao Inc ~ IL
rnpDSe profif that would nave aCCl Nou - -
<-o, 4le free coinage Of the 50-cent dollar l1kII
the smaller profit which would nave acciueu "
them merely from the general lnous.Tlai Ia, p 80,
-,a-Srv of the country Because OF IleH PEI
soraI interests and against the interest OF -
community at large these trust aeIaIes e.- r1
s1,rrlorred YOU Ny belief Is, and the statemen1
- Tudge Priest quoted above and the att1uoe
nf many men Of large financial interest," NaFIaiI.
me IN expressing the oelleI, ina tS IL.osS 7 - 80
snaznates whose fear Of being prosecuted uhueI ~
TIE law by ATr Taft Is greater tnan thelr Iea, ,,
of general business adversely under you VIII
support you and not Nj Tatt-
THE HUGHES CONTRIBUTIONS.
7 now come TO what you have 10 say as TO con-
t-Ibutions, and here YOU furnish your owl AZ
sver You state that IL appears from the pun
13sbe5 Statement OF the contribution 10 Mr..
F5ughes's campaign for Governor two years ago
thai various men Of wealth. some or them CON
,-arre5 with hig corporations whom you name, 10
the number Of nine, contributed from S-oocV 70
$500 apiece, You ask: Moulo me lacl . Ina
4hese gentlemen contributed 10 his campaign
fund strengthen or weaken his testimony against
me reasera blenesS Of our antitrust remedy
and later You continue by asking: Are you
willing 10 say that any pubic lnteresi VIC. Nos
served in 1904 by concealng until after elec1loh
the contributions made 10 the Republican cam
rsigr fund by Mr. Hartman, and those col
seofe6 ov him for Others? Are you willing 10
szv that the publication before election OF the
confrihutions then made would have no effect on
the election 60 You then purpose 10 publish the
names of contributors before election and ask
us 70 DO the same
Mr. Hughes are utterly trivial compared 10 the
srnoun1s have already mentioned as contrib
uted 20 your campaign in 1886; but IN my Judg-
raenT the amount contributed mas noIIlIS "llab-
ever 70 DO with the point aI issue The Gues-
rion was, for instance, whether Mr. Clark OF
Montana when he contributed heavily 10 your
campaign fund, had q proper motive. ana
whether your actions would or would not have
been inferred properly or improperly by lhal
tribution; and the same question applies 10
M Hughes and 10 me. In the case Of Ny
Hughes and myself the answer is fortunately.
easy You have nothing 70 do bur examine our
records IN the ofnces 10 Vhlch we were Don
elected You either know or ought 70 have
known before writing that IN not one instance
has Mr.. Hughes as Governor. done one Ihlng
of any kind. sort or Description for any one OF
the contributors YOU mention. or for any other
contributor 70 his fund which ought not 10 have
been done and would not have been done II no
contribution had been made. Yet You clearly
imply that he is and has been improperly inf1u-
enced by the fact Of these contributions having
ton either straightforward or sincere
IN letter 10 the chairman Of my campaign
committee on October 26 1901 ! specifically ap-
proved OF the conditions under which the ma
tionaI committee were accepting contributions.
saying that their acceptance was 70 be Win me
explicit understanding that they were given with
no thought Of any more obligation the part
Of the national committee or Of the national ad-
rninist-ation than Is implied n the statement
that every man shall receive square deal no
more and no less. and that this shall guarantee
him in any event 70 the best Of my ability. II
they subscribe for the purpose Of securing sucn
national welfare and with thought Of per
sonal favors 10 them why. they are acting as IS
entirely proper. continued IN returning
the money 70 them amy contributors I wish Il
made clear thai there is not the slightest per
sOnal feeling against them. and that they can
count upon being treated exactly as well ny the
administration. exactly as fairly. as if had
accepted the contribution. They shan not suf-
fer in any wav because refused them. lust
as they would not have gained IN any way if
E-e had accepted them No member II the na-
1ional committee has ever directly Indirectly.
suggested 70 ne tiat should either DO or leave
undene anything whatever because ANY one had
contributed OF had failed 10 contribute.
THE HARTMAN SUBSCRIPTION
These are the facts: new for your proposal You
have yourself furnished lis condemnation. You
have quoted the subscriptions furnished 10 Gov
ernor Hughes as giving reason 10 distrust Gov
ernor Hughess attitude toward corporations and
an obliged 70 say that this cannot be sincere
your part. for you know well what the Gov
ernor's attitude has been throughout his term.
You quote the subscription OF Mr. Hartman 70
ny campaign. although you know well that il
6id not interfere with any action taken by me
as against Nr- Hartman, and ask II il would
not have affected the campaign # known.
Thereby you have furnished an excellent reason
for refusing 10 meet your proposal, for you
make Il evident that 10 adopt your proposal
NOl.c give 10 every man VINO cared merely Tor
psrtfsan success the chance- by precisely the
argument you have now made, 10 create 10 more
purpose the false impression that you are now
seeking 10 create. Mr.. TS4ts reputation Mr..
Tafts acts the bench and IN the executive
service show that ne could not he swayed in
any shape CT way by any consideration save
the public Interest ano that the fact Of any
mans contributing or failing TO contribute would
H8t n any way influence his action any more
than i has Influenced my action or the action Of
Governor Hughes. ] emphatiCally approve of
the publication Of campaign expenses after the
election, whether provided for by law or not. You
have shown by this letter Of YOURS that il the
contributions 70 Mr.. HUghes's campaign fund
had been made public before election YOU and
those who act with you would have striVen 70
give the false impression that Nr- Hughes was
unfit 70 be trusted with the position Of Gov
e-7o-; and you have shown by this letter of
hat " IN =r-f5,s -f,r, -