Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1908-09-26

Suiit SHoWH by SOuTI RECORDS.
In Oklahoma it is a matter of court
record. BY this court record it ar,
pears that the attorney general of tie
state, elected by the people, obuained
an injunction to prevent the Praii lie
Oil & Gas company from building a
pipe line, and that Governor Haskell
found this out while he was ut Den
yer, as appears by the representation
! for the dissolution of the injunction
made in his name on behalf of the
state before court of superior iuris-
diction to that which had issued the
injun ction.
In this the governor states that
the acting governor, in his absence,
had asked that the hearing be post
poned until he, the governor, might
return and have an opportunity to
investigate the controversy. The gov
ernor sets forth in his petition that he
is the sole authority to determine
such matters, and that the attorney
general had no right in the matter
and that the action of the Judge of
the lower court represented an en-
croachment by the judiciary.
Company Not in State Lawfully.
The attorney general opposed the
dissolution of the injunction stating
that the Prairie Oil & Gas company
was foreign corporation which hal
not accepted the provision of the CON
stitution applicable to such corpora
lions, and that without authority Of
law it was employing Il great force of
men and teams to dig up, across and
into various highways Of The stare for
the purpose of laying its ,ipe lines
The governor prevailed; the in
junction was suspended, and the pipe
line was permitted to continue its
work, to use the words nf the attorney
general without any color of law"
call your attntion to tie fact that the
il junction was proper The point is
that the governor was a'ert to take
out of the hands of the attorney gen
eral what the attorney general fel;
was hts sworn duty to prevent, m al
legged irs:ance of the breaking Of the
laws by Ills particular great CT r,Ja
tlon
Has Not Even Attempted Defense.
AS far as I have seen, Governor
Haskell has not even attempted anv-
thing which can be called a defense
of this action Of his. 1t thus appears
that his action was as inexcusable as
it was wanton, except on the theory
that in defiance of the attorney gen.
eral of the state and at all hazards he
intended for some reasons of his own
to protect the interests of a great co.,
poration against the law
1t has been suggested on his behalf
that after all he did not favor the
Standard Oil company but merely the
Prairie Oil & Gas company. This
claim is disposed of by the testimony
g the Standard Oil company itself
taken in the latter part of 1907 in the
suit now pending before the United
States court at ST. Louis against the
Standard Oil company.
Owned by Standard Oil.
In this testimony the Standard Oil
company, upon being required by the
government to put in list of all the
companies in which it held stock, or
in which it's subsidiary companies held
stock, reported among others the
Prairie Oil & Gas company, total cap
ltal. $10,000,000, of which the Ma
tlonal Transit company's proportion
was $9,999,500, and Furthermore it ap-
pears that the National Transit COM
pany has capital stock of S25,455,
200, of which the Standard Oil com
pany owned S25,451 $50. In other
words, the Prairie Oil & Gas company
was owned all except $500 by the Ma.
tional Transit company and this Ma
tional Transit company was owned all
except about $3.50, by the Standard
Oil company.
Now contrast your action in this
case of Governor Haskell with Mr.
Faft's action as regards Senator For
aker, as set forth in his letter of July
70, 1907, which I quoted in my state
m@nt. 1t was matter of common no.
torlety about Senator Foraker, as it
has long been matter of common no.
toriety about Governor Haskell that
he was the defender and supporter of
certain great corporate interests and
therefore hostile to the policies, for
which this administration has stood.
Taft Proved Words by Deeds.
There was no such convincing proof
against Senator Foraker at that tine
however, as there was against Gov
ernir Haskell, when. as you say, he
was with s. ur approval made treas
urrr of your campaign committee But
Mr. Taft refused to be party to the
denomination of Senator Foraker. even
though it was represented that only
thus could he advance his own inter-
ests, showing by actual deeds that his
words were true when he said: II do
not care for the presidency if it has to
come by compromise with any one on
matter of principle
With a hundredfold clearer evidence
before You as to the connection CT
Governor Haskell with the Standard
Oil than Mr.. Taft then had as to thu
connection of Senator Foraker with
any corporation, you nevertheless,
having secured Governor Haskell as
chairman of the committee to write
the platform on which you stand, pu
him in as treasurer Of your campaign
committee.
Other Proofs of HaskeIIs Guilt
Let me add that Governor Haskel's
u,ler unfitness for any public position
of trust or for association with any
Nan anxious to make an appeal on a
| 1oral issue to the American people,