New-York tribune., 1918-05-20
answering the CoIoneps
Charges, He Says Both
Have Been Accused
-
Explains Why He
Didn't Take Action
Couldn't Obtain Conviction
Of Either in Courts,
Is Assertion
aspec.ai Dispatch to The rabmel

partment under the cspibnage act was
answered to-day by Postmaster Gen
cral Burleson in a statement replying
to Colonel Rooscvelt's indictment of
the Postofice Department. rhc eX
planation is as folows:
"Mr. Hearst, through his vast news
paper circulation and writings alcng
l'pes familiar to the public, and Mr.
Roosevelt, with the prestige of an eX-
President Of the United States. writing
along entirely different but equally
we'll known lines, have each said things.
whatever the motive, that q casual
reader might believe were in cDnfiic.
with the espionage act. But those
whose responsibility it is to enforce
.his law 90 not believe 9 case could be
made to stand against either of them
in the courts
I'm the Courts Underscored
The words sin the courts" are under
scored.
The Postmaster Generals statement
follows:
81 have waited patiently for Mr..
Roosevelt to substantiate his state
May s TO the effect that the Post
Office Department was using the
espionage acs for political purposes by
Furnishing papers which upheld the
war. but which told the truth about
She Administrations failure to conduct
the war efficiently and by failing to
proceed against powerful newspapers
which opposed the war OF attacked our
allies or directly or indirectly aided
Germany against this country as those
papers upheld the Administration and
defended ineficiency.'
Says I. Z. Evades Issue
Mr.. Roosevelt's reply Of May II,
which he then termed preliminary in
The main evades the issue presented
and is thoroughly misleading. He
.ier's' and The Metropolitan Maga-
zine' in way which has created the
impression that these publications
have been the objects of improper dis
elimination by the Postofiice Depart
,nent.
"This department has taken no ac-
tion against Golfers.
This department has taken no ac-
ton against The Tribune.
carly in the war the department
brought to public attention typical
seditious matter which was pelng cir
culated throughout the country. 1t
made available to newspaper men its
files disclosing such disloyal matter.
The Tribune promptly availed itself
of this opportunity and gave helpful
assistance, for which patriotic service
| personally thanked one of its staff
correspondents.
"The department has taken no action
against THE Metropolitan Magazine
With respect to this magazine the
incident referred to by Mr.. Roosevelt
occurred after the magazine had passed
through the mails, and not a COPY Of
tered for mailing failed of transmits
sion. The facts with respect to this
matter were made public in state
ment by the solicitor, which appeared
IN the morning papers of March TO- Mr.
Roosevelt's contention that THE Metro
polltan Magazine was injured from
that incident is unfortunate. 1t cannot
be said that the magazine lost sales
on that account at that time
On the contrary, more copies of
The March issue were sold on account
of the publicity given the matter. The
injury. therefore, must have followed
rs d result of public disapproval OF
the matter contained in that issue. |
have yet TO learn OF a patriotic reader,
Unless 1t be Mr.. Roosevelt. who ap-
proved the publication in that issue
o. the article, IS America Honcst?' bv
William Hard.
This department received a large
number of letters from widely scpa-
rated section OF the country charac-
terizng the publication of the Hard
article as bad from every viewpoint,
Some claimed it was unpatrictic
others that it violated the espionage
act, and still others that it was
reasonable.
should repair the injury CD to the
magazine by joining him in commend
ing the Hard article as desirable lit
erature Tor forwarding the war aims of
the government, cannot accommodate
him.
81 am reliably informed that Ger
many highly appreciates the Hard ar
ticle~~so highly, in fact. that her
propagandlsts have translated it into
Serman, Ser; Spanish, Portuguese and the
scandinavian languages, and arc now
hoodlng Mexico, South America and
other countries with copies OF it, Mr.
Roosevelt could hardly add to the in
jurous effects of this article should
he now have it reproduced in The
congressional Record IN full with its
'dlsgusting illuatrations accompanied
by his express approval, thus giving it
Tree and unlimited distribution.
so much for Mr.. Roosevclt's first
charge. Now, what of the second?
The press of every complexion
should always have the widest latitude
Tor criticism of the acts Of all public
officials. This principle is CONSTANT.
Kept IN mind in the administration oi
the espionage act and the disposing OF
complaints made Hereunder.
II he Postofiice Department has re
caiVed pcsslbly more complaints from
the public alleging that Mr. Roosevelt.
articles were III violation of the cs
y nlonage act than it has against the
Hearst newspaper. No matter published
by either Mr.. Roosevelt or Mr.. Hears
has come to my attention which. in IN,
opinion. warranted action by the Post
efilce Department under the cspionap,
act against either Of them
"All but two of t'le articles in tn,
Hears, papers referred to By Mr.. Roose
welt were published before the passage
OF the espionage act tJune IS, 1910.
and some of them before our entry into
the war. The Postoffice Department
can hardly be expected even by Mr.
Roosevelt to take action against ;
paper for the publication of matteI
which was printed and circulated be
fore the passage of the law
The two articles specifically men
toned appeared in 'Thc New Yorl
American OF Ju.y ., end Twcm',or -
1877. Nh. Roosevelt is n"t 'a-~ya.