The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-07-05
Did Not Resign Voluntarily, But Was Literally
 Forced Out
CONTRADICTED BY
 OTHER OFFICIALS
Tried Every Scheme to Retain His Office, Says Secretary-Neces- sary to Write Four Times
 Before He Resigned

l LancdsSter, MdSS., July f.-Secretary
 MacVeagh who Is visitor at the home
 of Bayard Thayer, today received many
 telegraph and telephone messages from friends and official acquaintances ex-
 pressing confidence in his administration
 of the department and prepared a
 lengthy statement of has side of the con
 troversy precjpitated by MT. Andrews
 letter of resignation.
 The statement of the secretary says: .I regret that it seems necessary to re- fer to the letters published by A. Piatt
 Andrew and addressed to the President
 and to me. The virulence of the attack
 has probably limited its effect; but apart from the attack upon me he strangely
 misrepresents a number of the chief men of the treasury department to whom I
 attribute large measure of the success
 of the department work and seems to
 deny that anything has been accom-
 plished either by them or anybody else.
 am obliged therefore to restore Mir.
 Was Forced to Resign
 MT. Andrew says he resigned because
 of the conditions in the treasury depart
 pent of which he disapproves. A com
 parison of this statement with the facts
 is probably the simplest way to test the
 animus and the veracity of his letters.
 He did not resign voluntarily but was asked to resign-and asked repeatedly and he used every effort and influence possible to get the request for his resig-
 nation withdrawn; and pleaded to be all lowed to continue in his place. And it was when he had failed to have the re-
 quest for his resignation withdrawn. and because of this. that he made his attack and chose to give the impression that his resignation was matter of his own | choice, and determined upon for public reasons.
 "The details as to his resignation are as
 follows:
 "On June 24, when Mir Andrew returned
 from Chicago I formally asked in note
 for his resignation. He called on me at
 once to urge me to change my mind and
 allow him to stay. At his wish explained at length my reasons and listened to all l his arguments and wishes. I felt, how
 ever, obliged to tell him the request for | his resignation could not be withdrawn. I ! supposed MT. Andrew would send his resi- 1 ignation promptly and as a matter of l course as had never known of a case where such a request had not been promptly compiled with.
 q waited. however, without reply until
 June 8, when I wrote again. repeating the request. On the 29th MT. Andrew sent me l a brief note treating the matter with vagueness. I rsplied immediately saying I I could not accept vagueness, but wished 1 to have that day either his resignation or l his refusal to resign. To this he did not reply at all. And, therefore, on July ? I wrote fourth time. renewing the re- quest and communicating copy of let
 ter addressed to me by the President au- l thorizing and directing me to ask for the resignation. I asked for prompt reply, stating that I was going out of town. I
 left Washington on the midnight train without hearing from MT. Andrew and saw in the next afternoons paper long ex- | tracts from two scurrilous letters, one to l the President and one to me, which at last
 conveyed his unwilling resignation. Tried to Use Influence l Meanwhile as I only learned after a week, MT. Andrew had diligently used the
 interval while was waiting to secure all | the influence he could to aid him in keep | ing his place. Besides arguing the case himself with me and with certain senators,
 and besides having his case argued both at the White House and before me. he ar- gued his case himself at the White House MT. Andrew did not at any time men, ton to me any objection to his treat | ment in the treasury except that he thought I did not give him as much of l my time as I ought; and that had sometimes allowed other callers to be received when he was waiting. On the other hand, some of those connected with my office-and who were impa rtial ba 1,oA 1 tain periods too much of my time. Ger I tainly his curious calculation of the amount of the time given him will strike everyone in my office with vSon- derment.
 NO other complaint or criticism did
 Mir Andrew ever offer. And 1t Is hard lly necessary to point out that a man whose grip on his place l could hardly shake loose could scarcely have found | his place undesirable or his assistance uncomfortable.
 1 If Mir. Andrew could represent him. | self as resigning voluntarily when he was, with unusual difficulty, forced to 1 resign, it causes no wonder that he | should call as witnesses a group of i'm portant men of the department who
 nearly all immediately contradicted him land whose immediate assurances to | me by telegraph and telephone are 1 among the pleasantest happenings of my official lie. NO one Tn the depart ment who has done successful work would, I believe, indorse any of MT. Andrews statements.
 Andrew Not Efficient There is nothing out of the usual in Mir. Andrews case. The work of the treasury department was and still is strenuous, ow- ing to the programme adopted at the be- ginning of the administration, and 1t is necessary to have all three of the assist ant secretaries not only able but efficient.
 It was great disappointment to me that
 MT. Andrew was not efficient enough 10
 meet the requirements and that 1t was necessary 10 get some one else That is all there was to it. when the change was decided upon. Subsequently,. in direct dis obedience to my instructiqns written and then repeated in two interviews sought by him and without my knowledge until he had left Washington. he went to the Chicago convention when the other two assistant secretaries had already gone by previous arrangement
 This irresponsible conduct must have led Into any event to his prompt separa- ton from the department Mfr Andrew, see. has made the statement that he told me that he wished to so to Chicago to
 further monetary legislation This is ~-----~ ts >--~~