New-York tribune., 1911-11-27
B iRRELS.

II is n great convenience to the press
and the public 10 have Mr. John ID.
Hockpfpller'S character for wicllednesS
so well established as it is. When a
new story of his inhunian lust for gold
is related il is 10 be believed at once.
No suspension of Judgment is required
no waiting for the other side TO tell its
story is To be considered. There are not
two sides 10 any story affecting Mr..
Rockefeller. To b2 sure. Mr.. Rockefeller
will make an answer to the charges. II
is "A habit that he got into long a@o. and
though he ought to have perceived before
this the ,futility of it, he keeps /, up. Just
as if the public would take the trouble to
read bis denial. The status of q Rocke-
feller answer has been settled for sew
eral decades II is not 90 he believed.
Public knowledge that il Is not TO he be-
lievcd saves the trouble of even reading
il and avoids the delay of even waiting
TO hear il.
There are two things t. be believed
about Mr. Rockefeller at once and with
out inQuiry-one. any story that he has
robbed Of millions anybody on earth who
cares 10 charge him with IT, and the
other. any story that he has given mill
ions for a philanthropic purpose. Each
is instantly credible. Mr. Rockefeller
does not deny the accounts of his
philanthropies. His failure to deny
them is accepted as confirmation. He
always does deny the story of his rob
berries. His denial in this case is also
confirmation.
Mr. Leonidas Merritt not being uni
verSity. q society of medical research or
other philanthropic institution, the story
that he had been robbed Of millions was
to be accepted at once After seeing the
"On King" he had 10 walk the ties"
back to MinneS0ta-"in a barrel as the
popular Imagination completed the pict-
ure. being quick TO react to the 'Rocke-
feller the robber" stimulus. The mat
ter is settled. Mr.. Merritt did 90 home
i'm barrel Mr.. Rockefeller thereup0n
put his own barrel TO a more commodi-
Gus and characteristic use-and soon
was able to afforl another large contri-
button 10 q university. That is estab-
lished beyond a doubt for has not Mr..
Merritt hardy pioneer and eXploiter Of
the Mesaba Range told the story
ITO be suEc, the Rockefeller denial s
out. and if the Rockefeller character for
Iascality were not indisputable il would
.c read and It's readers might be bewll-
tered by the conflict Of statements be-
tween 1t and the Merritt version Of the
episode of the two barrels \ plausible
denial is that of Nj Rockefeller, or Of
his agent Mr.. Gates They haven't been
issuing denials all these years for moth
ing On the whole it is we'll that the
custom Of knowing in advance and with
out reading that every Rockefeller denial
is false throughout is inveterate. for eX-
animation Of this latest denial would
only serve to puzzle the public mind As
to what did actually happen. You might
almost suppose that the robbing Of the
MerrittS was Il correct business tranSac-
tion. in which they got what they wanted
and felt at the time that il was all that
was coming to them That is. You might
if the mere fact Of Mr ROckcfclCr's
participation in the affair did not make
that conception perfectly Incredible
And then, again, if the denial was worth
even a moments consideration YOU
might speculate why Mr.. Rockcfcl3r
after treating the McrrittS so fairly As
is set forth in Mr.. Gates's statement. in
sisted a few years later on presenting
them with $4,000. LeonidaS Merritt Is
not Il phianthropic institution,
But. then. no one viii speculate On
the very probable sounding explanation
put cut in Mr. Rockefcller's behalf Or
on the one point in il that calls for eluci-
dation. Considering Rockefeller denials
is supererogatory Lon" Merritt was
robbed and sent home in barrel 1t
was lucky for him that Rockefeller did
not take the barrel. also. TO ship stand
ard oil I'm.