Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1908-09-30

recommendation of ii Standard Oil attor-
ney to the federal bench, Il place where
the ;udge might have to pass on the
charge against the very trust for which
he had been attorney.
While the trust attorney to whom you
refer is not an official Of trust. l will
warn him, and through him his clients.
that if | am elected | will not only Wig
orously enforce against all offenders the
laws which we hope to have enacted in
CON pliance with the Democratic platform.
but that | will also vigorously enforce.
existing laws against any and all who
violate them, and that I will enforce them
not Systematically ard internationally. but
persistently and constantly: they will not
be suspended even for tho protection of
ca hinct officers.
You say 1.-The attitude of many men of
large financial interest warrants YOU In
expressing the belief that those trust
imaonateS whose fear of being prosecuted
under the law by Mr. Taft is greater
than their fear of general business adj
versity' under me will support me rather
than Ny Taft. You have attempted t"
word that statement in such Il way to
tldln tHt support VI an tut II tSt
mates and vet put it on the groond that
they are supporting Your party for pa
tliotc reasons rather than for the pro-
motion of a selfish interest. That is in
genious hut it is not sound. The trust
masnates are supporting the Republican
PARTY, and the Bible offers an cxplana
ton. "The OK knoweth his owner and the
ass his masters crib
You admit that you gave permission to
the steel Trust to absorb rival and
thus increase its control of the output of
steel ard iron products. ! will leave the
American people to pass Judgment upon
the trust question with mine.
You refer to our campaign funl in 1896
and accuse us of allowing two men to
contribute largely to the small fund with
which the committee conducted the cam
pagn. ] am not sure about the figures,
because J have not seen an authentic
statement of the contributions. but I was
informed that tire largest of the two
sums which YOU mention was not all con-
tl.butcd ny the man to whom it was
credited. but included contributions from
others as we'll that which hn gave
himself. But if you want to be fair. who
do YOU not give the amount of The Re-
publican campaisn fund that wear and the
sources of it3 7 am willing to have both
funds published: arc you? If some of
those who contributed to our fund Of less
than s30c, 600 had a pccuniary intnrest in
the result Of the election how will Won
explain the enormous contributions made
To No
member. the Democratic platform candid.
~ declared the partH's purpose If the
carrying out of that policy would have
been Of advantage to anyone. the whole
public had knowledge and the publication
of the contributions would not have ar-
footed the result
Publicity as to campaign funds is not
needed to make known that which is dis
closed by the platform. but to direct at
fention to secret agreements expressed or
implied which would otherwise be con |
tealcd from the pubic.
You certainly pay moro attention to
the mote than to the beam when YOU
find fault with our national campaign
fund III 1896 and ignore the significance
Of fund almost as large which. at
NouI request, was corrected from Il rev 1
persons in 1904 and was used in one
state and was only a small item in the
fund collected that wear But your let
ter presents a defence of your party'S |
position and an accusation against the |
voters which emphasize an issue al
ready prominent. You are the first |
conspicuous member Of your party to
attempt an explanation Of the party's |
opposition to publicity before the cleo |
ton. and the admission which you
make will eEbarrass your party as
sociates. Your position is that the
publication before election of the con- |
tributions made to your campaign fund |
would furnish your political opponents
an opportunity ITO give false i'm |
preston" as to the fitness Of the can
didateS.
You site as illustrations the contri- |
Continued on Page Twclve)