The morning journal-courier., 1908-02-10

the insnector showed that it was IT, I advisable to re-appoint the lleui,ipe
 and that MT. Wetherill. who hau peop
 originally recommended for the po'i-
 tion hv senator Dick, should pc ap
 noipted Senator Dick afterwards
 withdrew his recommendation pu. . i,, inspector reported that MT "etnel.' had by that time already been appoin'-
 ed ann that to withhold his comliiiS- sion would be great injury to mn r, a,
 would defeat the ends Of justice.
 nomination was accordingly sent iii ,,,
 At Wapakoneta the incumbent uiu his work well, but the postofilce ihspe.
 tor reported that the feeling was ."
 most unanimous ancng ms to't0"
 townsmen that there should pe
 change, and a Mir. Moser appoinleu' It
 appearing that the postmaster was iio'
 popular with the people, while tile man
 suggested for the nomination was uii-
 occasionally the choice of the paironS
 of the office, being regarded by then,
 as most progressive and pupilc-spn
 tied young business man, possesseu ol
 more than ordinary ability, "extremeiy \ popular with the people or ms nals.
 city, irrespective of party afhilatiohs
 I call your attention to the fact lhal
 the senate withdrew it's opposition U
 one of these four men and conni iieu
 him, so that the charge relates to OILY
 three out of the whole number, eleNeh
 hundred and fifty-four postoifices; thae
 of these three, two were nominated H.
 the usual fashion on the recommends
 ton of the out-going congressman ana
 that the third nomination was made
 on the report of the inspector and
 would have been made without the
 slightest regard to whether there was
 a presidential canvass on hand or not
 The statements in the editorial in
 question are therefore untrue In every
 particular,
 As for you quotation from another
 newspaper, running as follows; red eral office holders may be command ed to use their influence and their
 authority in behalf of candidate
 Such a command has been issued and ] lltt HltSluNIll Siituli hliph VA AN
 Somebody has instruct ed postmasters that they must obtain from their subordinates either their
 signatures or their pledges of support
 for Taft delegates to the convention Even in Massachusetts efforts of this kind have recently been made but happily they have been
 pta Itr n ttt1n ct
 CTS on whom the attempts were made
 had the courage to resist, and partly
 from other causes" There is really nothing to say except that it does not contain the slightest particle of truth and that the misstatement is so gross , that it is difficult to believe It other } than deliberate invention. There is r not the slightest foundation for 1t. and $ no successful effort can be made to 2 show that there is the slightest foun- : dation for it. As regards the Massa- : chusetts postoflices, fn all except five r case my appointments were reap $ polntments; that is, the incumbent
 was re-nominated. with the consent : of the senators or congressman at the tAHlIdAlpfi VI Nilt hidi l'llHHs vt s these five cases, new men were put in = three times because of death and , twice because of the resignation of the
 incumbent In each case whether of
 appointment or reappontment I fol- lowed the usual custom, as In each ] case the men suggested were eminent . ly f,t Not a particle of difference ' |, hna Io in +, ,le hot ., those congressman who were for one presidential candidate and those con gressmen who were for another; and so far as I know in every case the . appointment has fully satisfied the To- cal people In other words, the ap- pointments have been made not to . control, but to recognize the sentiment of the locality.
 . If such assertions as those of these papers are made in good faith, on knowledge of facts, and with any other purpose than to produce political cf- feet by false pretense, or by reckless . statement without knowledge, let those making them produce the specific cases . to which they refer. If in any such NdSe iilh dENuSdllNtl lS iUuIll IuP, It will have occurred without mly know . ledge and I shall deal with it in the precise spirit of my instructions to the civil service commission hereinafter re- ! ferred to-
 So far as | know the only other ac- cusations that have been made as to { the use of patronage have been in connection with the pension agent in !. New Hampshire and collector of in. ! ternal revenut in Ohio. In the case oi the pension officer. the senators and ! congressman could not agree on a nom. inee, two recommending one man and | two another.
 { decided to send in a man recon :. mended to mo by outsiders. whom 2 believed to be better fitted than either The senate rejected him His nam' }. would have been sent if there hat E been no presidential canvass at all a ]. this time Ae regards collectors of in {. ternal revenue, some are appointed upon the recommendation of senator E and some on the recommendations o r congressman In Ohio the collector o internal revenue whom I nominated il s the first district was recommended h, :. the congressman of the district.
 .- In the Tenth district l followed tn : recommendation of the two senators In other words, I followed the sam course in Ohio as in other states a \ regards all these nominations. tn only difference being that Ohio Is tn single state where the bulk of tn federal employees have been incline to be against the presidential candi lntn rrnnn fhn cfnfn In Nnu Nnrl