The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-06-04
AND WHC|WROTEIT
Wagstaf Didn't Indite Last Let
ter to Stubbs.
Leahy Says MulVane and Smith
Are Authors.
GOV. STUBS ANSWERS
Makes Defense of Various De-
partments of State.
Claims That All Are Economic
ally Administered.

David Leahy's preface to Governor
Stubbs reply to the last Wagstaff let
ter is about the most sensational state
ment made since the campaign opened.
In it the allegation is made with con-
| f1dence and backed by evidence that
the Wagstaff letter was not written by
Wagstaff at all. That he had been up
in northwest Kansas on a campaign
trip for days before and at the time
the letter was written. That Dave
Mulvane and ex-senator F. Dumont
Smith conceived the letter within the
walls of the Topeka club and wrote
it in Mulvane's Office. That they signed
Wagstaff's name to the letter with per-
feet assurance and sent it to the public
as Wagstaff document. Mr.. Leahy
argues that if these two gentlemen
dominate the young candidate for gov
ernor so completely at this time, they,
and not Wagstaff, will be governor
of Kansas in the event that Wagstaff
should defeat Governor Stubbs There
is food for reflection in the Leahy
preface.
| AS for the governors reply to Wag-
staff, it covers the ground and makes
direct replies to every argument and
| query. The two letters follow:
Leahy Makes Discovery
Allow me to call your attention to
| the enclosed letter from Governor
Stubbs, who is now speaking in west
ern Kansas. He sent it to me with ex-
press directions that when the facts
contained therein were thoroughly
verified by the official records of the
various departments of the state hav-
| ing relation to the subjects consid-
cred, it be forwarded to YOU. Proper
comparisons and verifications have
! been made and every statement has
| been found to be correct.
| Permit me to suggest that when the
| governor wrote his letter he had no
other idea than that the epistle to
which your name was attached. and
to which he was responding in good
faith, was written by yourself and that
you had authorized its publication. 1t
was not till this afternoon that this
| office had aScertained beyond a doubt,
| by careful inquiry and investigation,
| that your" letter was composed at
the Topeka club in this CITY and after
wards written in the office of Mr..
| David w. Mulvane by former State
Senator Frederick Dumont Smith of
kinsley, a member of the notorious
senate lodge, and that you were maxi
| ing an address at q Swedish settlement
| 200 miles away when your name was
attached to it and it was given out to
the press of the state as your letter.
1t is quite possible that if the gov
| ernor could be reached and made aware
| of these facts he may refuse altogether
| to answer it as not being a Genuine
| letter from yourself; or he may, on the
| other hand, take occasion to suggest to
the people of Kansas that if such gem
| tlemen as Mr.. Mulvane and Mr. Smith
| or any other persons who may have
been with them at the Topeka club
should feel safe now in taking sucn
| liberties with your candidacy they may
| demand and secure an equal privilege
after your election and Inauguration as
governor to shape your policies, dictate
| your messages to the legislature, write
your vetoes and approve pardons for
these influential fellows who may be
| languishing in the penitentiary. Who
knows, perhaps, but what they might
write out orders for the adjutant gem
| eral to send the militia to the mining
| districts of southeastern Kansas at tho
request of some socially influential
member of the mine owners organiza-
ton. do not feel, in the absence Of
| the governor, that I have any more
| than the right to suggest these things
| and to respectfully say to you that
am,
| Your humble servant.
DAVID d. LEAHY
| Secretary to the Governor.
Gov. Stubbs' Reply to Wagstaff.
| I have read with much interest your
recent statement which utterly fails to
| answer the questions 1 asked you al
/ most two weeks ago. 1 requested you
to show how the governor could possi-
! bly, increase state taxes one million dol
lars, as you charged in your keynote
speech at Independence, in the face Of
the law which provides a maximum
| penalty of five years Imprisonment for
| any official who expends any sum of
money not authorized by the legis-
| lature.
After waiting several months for the
| specific items upon which Senator Cur
| It's, who opened this controversy and
| made practically the same charges that
| you are making now, I find that you
| pin your faith to four items.
| The Penitentiary Extravagance.
| First-That the penitentiary cost
more per capita since the Oklahoma
| prisoners have been removed than It
| did before. This is a perfectly natural
| consequence which every business man
| readily understands While the cost of
| food per capita is very small indeed.
amounting to less than four and one
| half cents per meal per man, for men
4 who labor hard every day in the insti-
| tuition. the cost for warden, guards,
| watchmen, clerks and patrolmen must
| necessarily be almost as much for seven
| or eight hundred men as it was for
| thirteen hundred or fourteen hundred
men, and while 1 have talked with each
member of the board of directors of the
penitentiary personally about reducing
their employees to the lowest point con-
(, sistent with safety and good business
methods, and also with the warden, I
am fully satisfied that they are not
using a single man in the penitentiary
| who is not necessary to the institution.
/ will open the books and the doors of
| the institution to you, or your repre-
sentative, and ask you to name one
man. after having looked the whole
matter over carefully. who is not useful
| and does not earn the money paid him
by the state. Your criticisms of this
institution indicate that you would be
| CONTINUED on Next Page.)