New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-10-26

! venture fhe prediction that this is not
/ the sort of conduct which VIII commend
! him very strongly to the business stahuaro
! or nice sense OF honor OF the great mass
| of the voters of the state. plain busl-
| ness man. governed by the rules which
! exists among such men. would nave stayed
| at his lob until he had finished the work
| to which he had set his hand. even II the
/ salary were only the $4,000 year WhIch
/ Mr.. Stin1son so willingly gave up ID LdVor
| of the special retalners-
In a letter dated April 26. 1909. addressed
1 to the directors of the American sugar re
| fining Company, by their counsel. the stare
| ment is made that the government, IN
doubtedly acting upon the advice OF MT
Stimson had agreed to accept in full Tor
/ its claims against the company the sum OF
/ 81 900. 600 in addition TO the payment OF Iht
/ amount OF the judgment already obtained
| Of 1874 900 This settlement has been Ell
| fected and my opponents friends are max
/ ing much of his triumph in those cases as
well as in some other sugar cases in wnlch
| settlements were made It is, therefore,
pertinent to see what the amount at issue
| in those cases was. and there can be no
| better evidence than the same letter OF OF
| these gentlemen from which l beg now u
| quote They say: -.
through its -1ecial attorney. Mr.. Stimson,
/ has f1a7 ~elquidations Of iu1portations be-
| tween 1901 and 1907. by which the company
has been brought in further debt 10 1t 10
{ the extent of S. 239. 900.
/ DETERMINATIONS of importatious to the
/ same refinery from 1894 TO 1901 were threat
ened. and also importations TO Jersey CITY.
]
] into debt to the government II sustained,
! TO the extent of upward or SLeG0ye andl-
! ticnal king a total Of about S3C00,Oe
In addition to this. the government also
/ threatened to bring forfeiture proceedings
/ for all importations during the last three
years. outside of those involved in the suit
! which had been tried The claim under
! these fOrfeitures would have amounted to
about s6,0O0OOO.
! tentions of fact and law, 1t was entitled TO
/ collect not only the amounts involved IN
/ fOrfeitUres for the value Of the goods I'M
I ported.
ment threatened to sue amounted to nearly
In view Of these admissions. is IT not en-
! tirely fair to ask Mr.. Stirnson why those
! cases were not pressed for final trial
against a perfectly solvent corporation,
| which had been convicted of most meanIy
The sum collected from this company was a
| large sum. but ii was insignificant when
| compared to the amount which was claimed
/ by the government to be due from the COM
! pany, and practically admitted to be due by
! the counsel for the company
Asks About Sugar indictments.
| Why, all through this prosecution, con-
Quoted as conceded by the friends of my
opponent. with so much ability, but also.
as appears from the figures, with so much
| expense to the government has there been
so much consideration for the Sugar Trust
and those who were most responsible for
its formation and its conduct?
Why, for instance, did this determined
prosecutor. who. to believe either himself
or his nominator. could not be influenced
in hts work by pressure from any source.
no matter how exalted or how friendly
why did he leave to his successor the
bringing of an Indictment against John e
Farsons-father Of the Sugar Trust-and of
Mr.. RoOseveIt's great friend Herbert Par
sons?
During the term of Mr. Stimson as fed
eral District Attorney. and long before he
resigned that office. Mr. Earle. of Phtla-
delphia. as receiver. brought a civil action
against the American Sugar Refining Com
pany- This action was for fraud and con-
spiracy and for violation Of the antitrust
This civil action Of Mr.. Earle was subze-
quentIy settled by the payment by the
Sugar Trust 10 Mr.. Earle. as receiver. Of
about 100000 Although the evidence was
plain and clear that the directors and Off
GERS Of the Sugar Trust had violated the
Sherman antitrust law, neither Mr.. Slim
son nor Mr.. Roosevelt. as President, could
be induced 70 move against these officers or
directors. and they were not indicted until
July, 1903. after Mr. Stimson had gone out
of office.
Among those who we're then indicted with
the other directors was John E Parsons,
and Judge Holt, Of the United States Court.
has held that the statute of urnita tons now
bars this prosecution.
Has ny opponent been persuaded that the
only men who could commit a crime for
which they should be punished are the IN
fortunate UnderlinSs who have been already
.
wealth and social position. at The head of
the company, have entirely escaped punish
ment?
I recognize that every man is Influenced
my opponents position in these Sugar
Trust matters is explained by his long and
father OF the trusts and big corporations OF
the country. Mr. Root has been chief coun-
sci for the METROPOLITAN Street Railway
Company, for the Equitable Life Assurance
Society. for the Morton Trust Company;
counsel for thu electric light companies Of
the CITY Of New York. when they were con-
solidated into one giant corporation; coun-
sci for the Consolidated Gas Company of
New York. he was counsel with Mr.. Par
sons for the American Sugar company, and
generally represented-until he went into
the Cabinet-more corporations than any
other man in the country. During much
Of this time Mr.. Stimson was his law part
ner-did a large part Of the work and
shared in the emoluments coming from
such labor. Can these facts have in any
wav Influenced Mr.. Stimson in his action
and especially in his non-actfOn-iu these
Sugar Trust matters7
But. enough Of these matters.
I wish 70 repeat TO you. in language as
with my party squarelv upon the Rochester
platform and every plank thereof,
What Dix Stands For.
Il there IS a single man within the con-
fines Of the state VINO is in doubt about
my position on the enforcement Of the
public service laws 7 repeat and reitera te
that I stand sUuarely and unquali1edly for
the efficient and reasonable regulation Of
public service CorpoTatiOns-by the colttn-
uance and enforcement Of these laws-a
regulation in every way efficient rom the
single standpoint of the public interests
As 70 my statement about cOTruptiOn IN
public life. 7 again assert that 7 stand and
shall stand against corruption IN public
life in every form and every place, and that
make and shall make on that question no
distinction OF any kind political. social or
otherwise
f1uenCes of all kinds and in all places.
whether Il appear in the open form Of
bribery or in the more insidious and dan
gerous form of taking from the public by
indirection that which could not be taken
directly.
cali attention to the fact that all ex-
posures Of corruption in this state have
been aimed at legislatures controlled by the
Republicans, and repeat that II am Gov
ernor I shall drive the "blaCk horse cav
airy" regardless Of what party affiliations
thew NAV disgrace. out Of Albany. For
sixteen years the Republicans have con-
rrolIed both houses of the Legislature. and
II Is now q notorious fact that during this
time legislation has been traff1cke4 in and
the business interests Of the state black
cratic party that this must cease. and
DrOruise II the people place me IN control
Of the govern nent. that blaCkmail and cor
-ro+iou shall be driven in disgrace from the
Capitol Of this great state and the condi-
lions restored under which the reputation
of the state was untarnished and above re-
TIC 0eruoCracv q this sCate has now he
fore II a great opportunity and great re
sponsibility.
If the times we are about 70 win the
--latest victory in the history Of the state