Staunton spectator and vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1896-1916, 1908-10-02
DRIVEN OUT BY DISCLOSURES.

DRIVEN OUT BY DISCLOSURES.
There has been some billingsgate in
the air within the last few days. The
political horizon has been cloudy and
a storm seems brewing. What may
be brought forth is uncertain, but that
little ginger has been injected into
the campaign by one VIM. R. Hearst
records; ae has driven two men off the
Republican field and one off the DEM
ocratic. Two to one is not bad to begin
with, but he has hardly begun on the
Republican side, if those now mixing
in the campaign get their dues.
Mr. Foraker who drops out of the
campaign has been hit hard. He has
been caught with the goods. Gen. Col
man T. Du Pont, has also tucked
tail, and is now doing what should
have happened in the beginning. He
should never have been on the commit
tee with an indictment pending against
his company. But the Republicans
can scarcely turn for men save to those
whose hands are full Of filthy lucre and
whose garments drip with the slime of
graft and peculation. The party
thought to get some of Du Points mon
ey, it was after contributions, it knew
the character of the man, as well when
he was APPOINTED as when Mr.. Roose-
welt ordered him out, but it had not
seen the fret in the public eye so clearly
then as now. Mr.. Roosevelt was just
as culpable when Du Pont went on the
committee as he would have been to
have left him on, but he had not the
nerve in the face of disclosures to keep
him there. Had Hearst not fired into
the bunch Du Pont would still be hold
ing high place. There was no change
for higher morality's sake, nor did Du
Points unfitnesS come as surprise.
Roosevelt knew all along his company
was indicted and the acts for which it
was indicted were Du Points acts.
AS to poor old Gen. Foraker the case
is different. Foraker is not disliked
because of any connection he ever had
with the Standard Oil or any other
trust. His offence was that neither
Taft nor Roosevelt could control him.
They sought his scalp because they had
friend who wanted his job, not that
the friend was pure or more moral, but
because he was more comfortable.
When the President assumed so high
moral standard for men why did he
not follow it in the case of Paul Nor
ton. Paul Morton had violated the
laws of the United States, openly,
boldly, definitely. He had walked over
them as an OK treads the fodder, he
was liable to Indictment, fine, and
possibly imprisonment. He was q
member of Mr.. Roosevelt's cabinet
shortly before trouble came. II Mr.
Roosevelt would cleanse public morals
where should he have begun better
than at home? The facts were laid
before him by two prominent lawyers,
one of whom is today the Democratic
candidate for Governor of Ohio. What
did Mr.. Roosevelt do? He could moi
deny the facts, but he called off his at
torneys and laid down the theory thai
when rebates were given by Railroads
the officers vera not accountable, only
the corporation could be prosecuted
What did the attorneys do? They re
signed. They had no use for such jus
tice. They would not longer practice
before court which released the Grim
inals they had run down. Mr.. Roose
welt, as we see, can blow hot and colo
with the same breath. He can convict
a Democrat and release member o.
his cabinet. Talk about square deals
Here is one of them. Here Is higt
morality.