The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-09-28
SETS FORTH IN DETAIL
 HIS FIGHT AGAINST TRUSTS
Condemns Bryan For Not Acting
 Against Haskell.
Discusses Campaign Contributions, Praises His Man Taft, Siings More Mud at Haskell and Shows Plainly He is
 Scared.

Washington, Sept. 27.-Presiient Roosevelt late tonight made reply to William Jennings Bryan's recent let ter in which he maintained that the Democratic party and platform were not getting square deal" in the campaign that the Presidents profess sions of fair treatment entitled them to.
 Mr. Roosevelt's reply deals particu- larly with MT. Bryan's assertion that the administration has been neither sincere nor effective in the prosecution of trusts Mir. Roosevelt combats this charge with characteristic emphasis. and sets forth in detail what has been done under his direction towards curb ing the tendency of capital to cen tralize with a view to destroying com petition. The Presidents letter In part follows;
 Roosevelt's Letter.
 Washington, D. C., Sept. 27. 1908 "Dear Sir:
 T have seen your letter published in this mornings papers. As to most or what you say about me personally. do not regard any answers as neces- sary. When you say that I am unfar to your platform, you reiterate certain opinions as to which had quoted, with my hearty approval to Governor Hughes in my first letter; and these, therefore, 1t is also unnecessary te answer. Yoa have not answered the Hughes speech; and, in my judgment you do we'll not to make the attempt. You say that your platform declares in favor of the vigorous enforcement Of the law against guilty trust magnates and officials. and that the platform up- on which Mir Taft stands makes no snch declaration. It was not neces- nIo icies of this administration. and prom ised to continue themi and here. as nsuah | have only to compare your words with the deeds of the adminis- tration and of Mir. Taft. You merely promise in your platform that you in- tend to do just what this administra- ton has actually done and Is doing.
 ITO show the difference between deeds and words. I will compare the record of this administration with the record of one of your most prominent supporters at the moment, MT. Olney, Attorney General under the last Dem ocratic administration. While MT. OI- ney was Attorney General. no cases whatever were brought, under the antitrust law. against combinations of capital the only new cases which he brought being directed against com binations of workingmen. During that entire administration the only cases
  ital under che antitrust act were four in number, two of which were unsuc- cessful; one of the other two being the case which was decided by Judge Taft in favor of the government.
 Under this administration, a mass of such cases have been brought, in- cluding the case against the Northern packers; against the Federal Salt Company; against the General Paper Company; against the Otis and other elevator companies; against the Amer ican Tobacco Company; against the powder trust; against Virginia-Caro- lina Chemical Company; against the Standard Oil Company and others.
 Tn a number of these cases the gov ernment has already succeeded by in- functions and otherwise. Some of the cases are now pending In hardly any important cases against great law breaking corporations has the govern ment yet suffered final defeat.
 Indictments Against Shippers.
 "As regards suits to suppress rail- way abuses; under the last Democratic administration there were no indict- ments against shippers for receiving rebates on secret rates. Under my administration there have been forty nlne indictments for secret rebates, re- suitIng In eighteen convictions; and
  ments failed. The other twenty seven cases are still pending. Among the railroads which have been convicted are the Chicago and Alton; Chicago, Burlington and Quincy; the New York Central; the Chicago, Rock Island and and St. Paul; while scores of cases are still pending against other lead ing railroads.
 Among the shippers that have been convicted are some of the great est corporations in the United States: as for instance the American Sugar Company, the aggregate fine actually paid being more than $160,000; Swift and Company Armour Packing Com pany, the Cudahy Packing Company. Nelson Morris and Company, each of whom was fend $15,000, and the cases have now been carried to the Supreme Court. The Standard oil case is still pending. This is a record of actual achievement. and beside 1t mere prom ises are empty indeed; and they would not be made now with any possibility of performance resulting if it were not for the achievement above recited.
 You state that the steel company with my express consent. purchased one of its largest rivals. and thus ob- tained control of over fifty per cent of the total output. This action of the steel company (which increased its share of the total output by only about four per cent and in no way altered the standing of the company under the law), may have been violation of your plan, the absurdity of which has been exposed by Governor Hughes But there was no violation of the law I was cognizant of the entire trans action. It was not entered into by the steel corporation of it's own desire but solely at the urgent request of the corporation purchased and of the big banks holding that corporations securities, in order to enable them to prevent a crash which would have turned the panic of last fall into the most widespread disaster. I should in- deed, have been derelict in my duty if I had not efficiently used all the power Of the government where 1t could be