Staunton spectator and vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1896-1916, 1908-10-02
THE PRESIDENT
AIDED TRUSTS.

|
Bryan in Reply to Roosevelt Says
Some Caustic Things.
CHARGES WHITE HOUSE WITH APPRO-
VAL OF STEELE CORPORATION MER-
GER-GOv. HUGHES TOLD SOME PLAIN
FACTs-PUT IN OFFICE BY MOST COR
RUPT TRUST INFULENCES-SAME IN
TEREsTs NOW FIGHTING HIS RE-
ELECTION, ETC.
Milwaukee, Wis, Sept. 28-Charg-
ing that as Chief Executive of the Uni
ted States, President Roosevelt aided in
the combine of the Tennessee Coal and
Iron Company and the United States
Steel Corporation; that as the Head of
the Republican party the President
does not approve of the attitude Of
Judge Taft on the trust question, and
that Gov. Hughes was put in office by
the most corrupt trust influences in the
land, William Jennings Bryan to-day
issued vitriolic reply to the White
House statement in which the Nebrask-
an was accused of harboring the assist
ance of corporation agents.
Bryan charges the President as I'M
worthy of thetrust that has been placed
in him by the American public and de-
clares he is incompetent to serve in the
highest office in the gift of the people.
ANSWER TO ROOSEVELT.
Mr.. Bryant's statement follows:
"While | have not yet received your
letter, and shall not until reach home
next week, have read copy in the
press, and beg leave to submit the fol-
lowing reply:
''Mr. Haskell having voluntarily re-
signed from the committee, that he
might be more free TO prosecute those
who have brought charges against him,
l need not discuss the question of his
guilt or innocence, further than say
that the public service which he has
rendered and the vote of confidence
which he has received from the people
OF his State, ought to protect him from
condemnation until the charges can be
examined in some court where par
tisanship does not bias and where cam
paign exigencies do not compel pre-
judgment.
POLITICAL CAPITAL.
81 would not deem it necessary to
address you further, but for the fact
that you seize upon the charges and at
tempt TO make political capital out of
them. You even charge that my con-
nection with Mr.. Haskell's selection as
a member of the resolutions committee
and as treasurer of the committee raises
question as to my sincerity as an OPP
ponent of trusts and monopolies. AS
an individual, and as the candidate of
my party, recent the charge and repel
the insinuation.
81 have been in public life eighteen
years, and | have been sufficiently con-
spicuous to make my conduct matter
OF public interest. [ have passed
through two political campaigns in
which party feeling ran high and cpl
tibet was exhausted. l have no hesita-
ton in saying that you cannot find an
act, word, or thought of mine to
justify your partisan charge.
81 had never been informed of
charge that had been made against Mr..
Haskell connecting him with the
Standard Oil Company or with any
other trust. l had known him as a
leader in the legislative convention, and
had known him as one of the men
principally responsible for the excellent
constitution which has been adopted
by majority of over 100000, 10000 of
which was furnished by Republicans.
NOT COMMON NOTORIETY.
'You say that it was a matter of
common notoriety that Mr.. Haskell
was connected with the Standard Oil
Company. l have right to assume
that, if so serious an objection had
existed to Mr.. Haskell's election and
had been matter of common notoriety
in Oklahoma, as you say, Judge Taft
would have felt it his conscientious
duty to warn the people when he spoke
in Oklahoma.
"If he did not have the knowledge,
why can it be- assumed that l had 1t =?
And if he had it, how can you excuse
his fault to communicate the informa-
ton to the people of Oklahoma
'tIf you feel it your patriotic duty to
denounce Mr.. Haskell when he is only
member of the national organization,
how much more would Mr.. Taft have
felt it his patriotic duty to denounce
Nil IL etohCll w l1Cii liz w do do pllIllS W
be chief executive of great State. [
could have had no knowledge of the
suit to which you refer when he was
appointed chairman of the resolutions
committee of the Democratic national
convention, because the suit begun
while he was at Denver, and, as a mat
ter of fact, | did not know anything of
the nature of the suit until after he was
made treasurer of the national commit
tee, and no fair-minded person can de-
eide upon the merits of your charge
without an examination of the prOvi-
sions of the enabling act passed Re
publican Congress, and the provisions
of the license or franchise issued to the
Oil company by your administration.
OUTLOOK ARTICLE.
81 need hardly refer to the newly
found evidence upon which you lay SO
much stress, viz, the article of the Out
look of September 5. My attention was
never called to that article until l read
the published copy of your letter; and
while | have great respect for the Out
look, and | suppose | have for the
writer .(although you do not give his
nance, l would hardly feel justify in
deciding as promptly as you do on an
eX parte treatment without investiga
ton.
"You present an Indictment against
our platform declarations on the trust
question, but you do not refer to all OF