The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-09-28

Of contributors before election ana ash us to do the same.
 1 tributed to Mir. Hughes are utterly | trivial compared to the amounts I have | already mentioned as contributed to | your campaign in 1896: but In my | judgment the amount contributed has l nothing whatever to do with the point
 at issue. The question was. Tor in- | stance, whether Mir. Clark. of Montana, when he contributed heavily to your | campaign fund, had proper motive, and whether your action would or \ would not have been influenced prop | erly or improperly by that contribu- | ton; and the same question applies | to Mir Hughes and to me. In the case | swer is fortunately easy. You have | nothing to do but to examine our | records in the offices to which we | were both elected. You either know | or ought to have known before writ ! ing that in not one instance has Mir. | Hughes, as Governor. done one thing | of any kind, sort or description for | anyone of the contributors you men,
 ton. or for any other contributor to | his fund. which ought not to have been l done. and would not have been done if | no contribution had been made. Yet
 you clearly imply that he is and has | been improperly influenced by the fact | made. Do. you consider such an im-
 plication either straightforward or sim l cere?
 -"In a letter to the chairman of my | campaign of October 6. 1904. specifi- cally approved of the conditions un- der which the national committee was l accepting contributions. saying that their acceptance was to be with the explicit acknowledgement that they | were given and received with no | thought of any more obligation on the part of the national. committee admin | tstration than is implied in the state | ment that every man shall receive a | square deal. no more and no less. and | that this I shall guarantee him in any event to the best of my ability.
 If they subscribe for the purpose | of securing such welfare. and with no thought of personal favors to them.
 why they are acting as entirely proper. | I continued:
 l Tn returning the money to them (any contributors). wish it made | clear that there Is not the slightest
 personal feeling against them and that | they can count upon being treated ex-
 actly as well by the administration. ex- | actly as fairly as if we had accepted
 the contributions. They shall not suf- Ter in any way because we refused I them, just as they would not have
 gained in any way if we had accepted | them No member of the national directly, suggested to me that I should either do or leave undone any, | thing whatever because any one had contributed or has failed to contribute. These are the facts. Now for your | proposal. You have yourself furnished it's condemnation. Attacks Bryun's Sincerity.
 | have OtfOtAd the ettharrtr,ff a furnished to Governor Hughes as giv- | ing reason to distrusf Governor
 Httughes's ttuggf attitude towards corpora. this cannot be sincere on your part 1 for you know we'll what the Governors attitude has been through his term.
 You quote the subscription of Mra Har-
 riman to my campaign, although you
 know well that 1t did not interfere l with any action taken by me against
 MT. Hartman, and ask if 1t would not have effected the campaign if known. | Thereby, you have furnished an excel lent reason for refusing to meet your
 proposal; for you make 1t evident to l adopt your proposal would give to | every man who cared merely for par tisan success, the chance, by precisesy y | the argument you have now made. to
 create to more purpose the false im- | precision that you are now asking to
 create. MT. Tafts reputation. MT. Taft's acts on the bench and in the l executive service, show that he could
 not be swayed in any shape or way by any consideration save the public interest, and that the fact of any mans 1 contribution or failing to contribute would in any way influence his action,
 any more than 1t has influenced my &C., tion or the action of Governor Hughes. emphaticaily approved Of the pub
 lication of campaign expenses after l the election, whether proviGe1 for by | law or not.
 'T now come to the important part of your letter, your attitude towards MT. Haskell. You state that Mr. Has,
 kell has voluntarily resigned from tn c
 committee. You speak highly of the l public services which he has rendered and protest against any condemnation l of him except such as may come in court. Out of your own mouth you are condemned. You thereby set up that standard of law honesty which has been the bane of this people in | endeavoring to get equity and fair dealing--as they should obtain among ] high minded men from great business | corporations, and from individuals like MT. Haskell Apparently you dIsclaim 1 even asking MT. Haskell to retire from the position in which you placed him, | so that he retires of his own free will {; | anu JOu ubtCI uO WOEu OL COuQeuQnaLlOn | of his gross offenses against public decency and honesty. On the other hand, you strive to make it appear that his misconduct in reference to the | Standard oil Company Is all of which I he is accused, whereas, shameless as
 this particular act of his Is, 1t Is no | worse than countless others in his ca
 reer. I contrast your action in this | instance with that of MT. Taft in ref | erence to Senator Foraker.
 | MT. Taft's Action. e., | MT. Taft's statement when the Ques- | tion of his nomination was at stake
 was that he would rather not accept
 1t at the price of sacrificing principle l by supporting Mir. Foraker for Senator. | You do not venture in so much as the
 slightest possible manner to even csn- | sure Mir. Haskell for his manifold mis-
 deeds: although you well know that as regards the worst of them, no action | in court of law would lie.
 You ask that we leave the courts to
 deal with Mir. Haskell. As to some matters the courts have already dealt I with him. As to others. various pri-
 vate individuals whom he has wronged,
 and the United States government on l behalf of helpless Indians wh om he has | wronged, are striving to have the | courts so deal with him"
 Mir Nj. L. Mott. National attorney
 of the Creek nation, writes me as fol- | lows:
 "In October, 1906. Mir. FouIke. of
 Richmond, Ind. was sent to investi- gate the matter of the town site