Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1908-09-30
and compare your position on the
trust question with mine.
Campaign Funds Of 1876.

and compare your position OH III
trust question with mine.
Campaign Funds of 1876.
You refer to our campaign fun'
I'm 1896, a1d accuse US OF allowing
two men to contribute largely to th'
small fund with which the committee
conducted the campaign. ] am no
sure about the figures because | have
not seen an authentic statement OF
the contributions. but was informed
that the largest OF the two sums
which you mentioned was not all
contributed by the man to whom ii
was credited. but included contribu'
lions from others as well as that
which nc gave himself. But to be
Gair. why do you not give the amount
OF the X publican campaign iund
that year. and the sources of 1t?
am willing to have both funds pub
lished, are You? II some OF those
who contributed TO our fund OF l|SS
than 100000 had a pecuIiary inter-
est In the result OF the election. how
will YOU explain the enormous cOntri-
buttons to thu Republican fund. II
you will remember. the Democratic
platform and candidate declared the
party's purpose If the carrying out
of that policy would have been OF
advantage to any one. the Who'll, pub
lie had knowledge of il and the pub
iication of the contributions would
not have affected the result. Public
ity as to campaign funds is not need
ed TO make known that which Is dis
closed by The PLATFORM. but to direct
attention to secret agreements. cx'
pressed or implied. which would 9th
crwise be concealed from the public.
You certainly pay more attention
TO the mote than to the beam when
you find fault with out national cam
paign fund in 1896 and ignore the sig
nificance of a fund almost as large.
which at your request was collected
from few persons in 1904. and was
used in one state, which was only a
small item in the fund collected tina;
year.
Reflection on Voters.
But your letter pre- sents a defense
OF your party's position and an ac-
cusatiOn against the voters which
G emphasizes an issue already prom;-
nent. You axe the first conspicuous
member of your party to attempt an
explanation of the party's opposition
to publicity before election. and the
admission which YOU make will en-
barrass your party associates.
Your position is that the publica-
ton bsfOre election of the contrlb'i-
lions made to the campaign fund
would furnish political opponents an
opportunity to give a false impression
as to the fitness of the candidates.
You cite as Illustrations the contri-
buttons mada to Governor Hughes
campaign fund. the contributions cot"
lected by Mr.. Harrison and the con-
tributions which are now being col
lected for Mr. Taft's campaign funo.
You charge, that the people are so
lacking in intelligence that they might
condemn as improper contributions
which YOU declare to be proper. II
the voters differ from you on this
question are they necessarily ignos-
ant and wrong? Must the members
of the party organization act as sell
appointed guardians of the people, ard
conceal from them what is going on,
lest the people be mis&d as to the
purpose and effect Of large contritt'-
tionso Is this your explanation OF
the action OF the Republican leaders
in the national convention in voting
down a publicity plank.
A Better Explanation.
IF you will pardon the suggestion.
| believe that a better explanation
can be found in holy writ, for do we
not read Of men loving darkness
rather than light. because their deeds
are evil? You attempt to make a
personal question Of 1t, and asked II
any one accuses Governor Hughes
and MIR. Taft Of being Influenced by
contributions?
This is not the question. II 1t Is
found that a party to suit has given
a sum of money to one Of the jurors,
tie court does rot stop TO inquire
whether or not the juror is an incor-
ruptibIe man. or whether in accepting
the money, he explicitly stated that
1t was accepted with the understand
ing that he was under obligation to
consider it in making up his verdict
The court would hold that the giving
of money by an interested party. or
the receiving of money, was guilty OF
contempt OF court and interference
With the administration OF justice.
Public Offic; ala Like Jurors.
Public officials occupy the same
position as jurors. They are coz
StantIy called upon 10 decide the Qacc-