New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-06-12
N. Y. Democrat Wants to
Know How He Differs
from Wilson.
CALLS FOR BILL
OF PARTICULARS
Insists That Republicans Are
Responsible for Neglect
OF Preparedness.
from star Correspondent, Of Tho Tribune

From 4. STAT Correspondent, Of The Tribune
st. Louis, June Norman +. Mack,
national committeeman from New York,
started the ball rolling to-day by ask
ing ex-Justice Hughes how he would
have run things differently than Presi-
dent Wilson. Mr.. Mack says that the
Republican candidate fails to answer
this question in his statement of &C
ceptsnce, which the Democrat calls
plea in avoidance. Mr.. Mack declares
that Mr.. Hughes is "the pet candidate
Of those who put their nativity before
their Americanism."
What would Mr.. Hughes do Mr.
Mack asks, "to maintain the rights of
American citizens that the President
has not done7 Would he declare war
on Germany or England or both?
Would he intervene in Mexico
A lot Of other questions are asked
by Mr.. Mack, all of which tend TO show
that the nomination Of Mr.. Hughes is
giving the Democratic leaders here
something TO worry about. Here is
what Dir. Mack had to say about
Hughes this afternoon:
1.-THE one great question which rival
Presidential candidates must answer is:
What would you do differently How
would you have run things better than
President Wilson has done?
No Bill Of Particulars.
"Mr. Hughes in his statement Of &C
ceptance nowhere answers this ques-
ton. His statement is a plea in avoid
ance. Either directly or by implica-
ton he arraigns President Wilson
upon all the points IL controversy, but
he gives US no bill of particulars as 20
what changes he would have made. He
speaks Of 'nationa. eMgency' to which
y is his paramount auLy to respond.
Heckling the President docs not consti-
tute national eugency,' although it
may be deemed a partisan obligation.
"Mr. Hughes says that he stands for
an Americanism that knows no ute
rior purpose, for patriotism that is
single and complete, but Mr.. Hughes,
on the other hard, was the pet candi-
date of those who put their nativity
before their Americanlsm.
Were these elements mistaken when
they denounced President Wilson and
approved the candidacy Of Justice
Hughes? Which ia his sincere ntti-
tude, his silence when these elements
were booming him for the nomination
or his avowal of complete patriotism
now that the nomination has been
achieved?
"Wha. does he imply or charge when
he says that he stands for AN Ameri-
canism that knows no Interior pur-
pose? Whom does he accuse of ute
rior purpose? Is no hitting at Presi-
dent Wilson or ex-President Roosevelt?
Puts Blame on Republicans.
"Nr. Hughes demands adequate pro-
vision for national defence and con
dennis the inexcusable neglect that has
been shown in this matter His views
in this regard are expected, it is said,
to be acceptable. if not attractive, to
Colonel Roosevelt. Yet if there has
been inexcusable neglect the Repub-
lican party il chiefly responsible there
for. for il has enjoyed complete con
troll in all but three Presidential terms
since the Civil War.
ITO repair past neglect and to pro-
vide for adequate future defence is
President Wilson's paramount policy.
"What would Mr.. Hughes do to main
tain the rights of American citizens
that the President has not done?
Would he declare war on Germany or
England, OF bothl Would he inter-