The Washington times., 1927-12-20

ASaLuSQ tu9 couciuclon tuat JuGy
were absolutely false. And yet. on
the twentieth day q November,
1927. the Hearst papers published,
among olhef things. the following;
This documentary proof which
the American win continue to pub.
lish In consecutive form for some
days, was obtained from the most
secret files Of the Mexican gov.
ernment by officials OF that gov.
ernmenr. These men were firmly
opposed to the BOlshevist policy
Of their government and patrioti-
cally concerned lest this Russian
brand oi bolshevism should even
tually destroy their country and
wreck the peace and happiness of
their psap,e The revela-
ton of the amazing facts contained
in the documents, the Mexican Of
ficials hone. might result In uiti-
mate good to their country.
Sold Outright. He Says
You knew this statement was
false when 1t was published and its
only object could have been to de.
ceive the American people and to
try to convince them of the gem
uineness OF the proof which you
were offering.
You knew these papers had been
brought to this country not
through any patriotic motive, but
that they were sold outright for
cash to the Hearst papers and you
had, at that time. contributed the
money to make the payment. You
knew that these alleged Mexican
officials were moved only by tile
money which you were so willing
to contribute.
How easy 1t would have been
for you or one of your numerous
hirelings to have ascertained the
truth IN regard to these documents.
In one Of them it was alleged. for
instance, that Dudley Field Malone,
man known internationally. was
the go.between-the cashier. as it
were-who received the money from
the so-calied Mexican traders and
delivered Il TO the four Senators
named. How easy It would have
been for you or the editor of your
New York American to have called
Mr.. Malone on the telephone. All
of your editors knew the high char
acter and standing Of Mr.. Malone
You could have found out in
few minutes whether this al.
legged statement regarding him was
true: and IL he had told you. a.
he has since testified, that he
knew nothing about it. that he
had nothing to do with it. you
would at once have had positive
proof that there was something
wrong with these documents and
that no honest man could afford
to give It publicity without at least
making further investigation.
Before you published allegations
that would blacken the names Of
United States Senator'S. your repre-.
sentative in Washington could have
called upon these Senator's and
gotten their version OF the affair.
If they denied. as they have al.
ready testified. that they had any
connection whatever with this dis.
graceful business and knew moth,
ing of It. you would again have
had notice that any honest man
would welcome, that there was
something wrong with this docu.
ment which YOU purchased. And
your excuse, given on the witness
stand, that It would have given
premature publicity to the transac
ton. Is obviously false. You In
tended to give it publicity. You
admitted on the stand that that
was the object you had In view
You say in these articles that that
was the object which the Mexican
officials had in view when these
documents were turned over to you
All For One Cause
The ordinary observer win moi
cease to take notice that the four
Senators mentioned were all promi
nent in the Senate in their onn0Si