DCTOBHR 2, 1101
The Commoner.
5
FORAKER
In July, 1 907, Taft Wrote That He Would Not Compromise With Foraker Because of
Foraker's Affiliations and in September, 1908, the Two Men "Harmonized Their Dif
ferences" But When the Standard Oil Letters Are Made Public Foraker is Abandoned
In his statement printed In the newspapers
of Tuesday, September 22, Mr. Roosevelt pre
oented a letter, which It Is alleged Mr. Taft
wrote on July 20, 1907. The name of the gen
tleman to whom this letter was written is not
given but Mr. Roosevelt said that it was to
one of Mr. Taft's friends in Ohio. In that let
ter Mr. Taft said: "I don't care for the presi
dency if it has to come by compromise with
Senator Foraker;" also: "It is not on my part
a question of personal feeling with respect to
Senator Foraker. It is really a question of po
litical principle."
Now that it has been shown to the public
that Senator Foraker had dealings with the
Standard Oil trust, this July 20, 1907, letter
of Mr. Taft's is printed in the hope of persuad
ing the American people that Mr. Taft is thor
oughly devoted to the public interests.
LOOK AT THE RECORD
But let us take a look at the record be
tween July 20, 1907 tho date upon which it
is said Mr. Taft wrote a letter declaring ho
would not compromise with Foraker and Tues
day, September 22, 1908, the date upon which
Mr. Roosevelt made the Taft letter public.
Just -twenty days prior to the Roosevelt
statement, Taft and Foraker met at Toledo,
Ohio, and It was announced that their differ
ences were at an end. From that moment un
til the Standard Oil letters to Foraker were
made public, republican papers were filled with
congratulations upon the fact that harmonious
relations lmd been established between Foraker
and Taft.
CONGRATULATIONS ON THE COMPROMISE
Some of tho newspaper comments upon tho
Taft-Foraker compromise at Toledo, will be in
teresting, The Baltimore American (rep.) said that
tho settlement of the Taft-Foraker differences
"assures such a sweeping majority" as will
"over top most likely even the magnificent plur
ality which Ohio gave Roosevelt in 1904."
Tho Pittsburg Chronicle-Telegraph (rep.)
said: "The way is now clear for the rolling
up of such a majority for Mr. Taft as Ohio right
fully owes to her favorite son."
The Chicago Post, however, an independent
republican paper, did not become enthusiastic
over tho Taft-Foraker settlement. The Post
said: "The west will have some difficulty in
forgetting that the Ohioan alone of all the re
publicans in tho senate voted against railroad
rate legislation. It also will have some trouble
in washing from the memory recollections of
tho fact that pretty nearly everything Mr. Roose
velt suggested in the way of legislation was
anathematized by Mr. Foraker."
The Boston Herald, a Taft organ, printed
this illuminating editorial:
"The 'reconciliation' between Mr. Taft and
Senator Foraker is everywhere commented upon
as an incident which will greatly strength-en the
republican ticket in Ohio. But 'reconciliation'
is hardly the right word. There has been no
personal quarrel between these two eminent
men, whatever may havo been the caBe with
some of their supporters. And there is noth
ing new in the announcement that Senator For
aker will heartily support the republican ticket.
He announced that fact himself months ago
when he said that he would abide by whatever
decision the Chicago convention might make.
He repeated It as soon as the convention had
nominated Mr. Taft. One of the first messages
of congratulation received by Mr. Taft, imme
diately after his nomination, was from Senator
Foraker. And no ono who knows the senator
ever supposed that he would give less than his
hearty and whole support to his party's nominee
for the presidency. Matters remain where they
wore, with this difference: while Senator For
aker yields nothing in the courageous stand he
has so long maintained for Independence of
thought and action in tho upper chamber Qf
congress, and while Mr. Taft, as a candidate for
tho presidency, abstains from taking any side
on the question of Senator Foraker's re-election,
tho public has had an outward, visible demon
stration that the presidential candidate and tho
senior senator from Ohio understand each other
very well, are on cordial terms, and that any
idea there may have .been that Mr. Taft would
lend himself to tho 'elimination' of Senator For
aker is eliminated."
That harmony meeting took place at tho
Grand Army reunlon,in Toledo, Ohio, September
2, 1908.
Tho Associated Press reports of that day
tell tho story of how Taft and Forakor met,
clasping hands in full sight of tho audience and
greeting one another like old timo friends.
Did that look as though Mr. Taft was NOT
willing to compromise with Foraker when For
aker was strong and powerful and had votes
to deliver? But let it be remembered that when
Taft clasped hands with Forakor at Toledo, THE
STANDARD OIL LETTERS TO FORAKER HAD
NOT BEEN MADE PUBLIC.
Did Foraker's sin, In tho eyos of tho re
publican candidate for president, consist in be
ing found out?
Before these Standard Oil letters to For
aker had been made public several meetings
had been arranged for Cincinnati Ohio, on Tues
day, September 22. It had been arranged that
at tho evening meeting where Mr. Taft was to
be the principal speaker, Senator Foraker was
to preside. And republican papers all over the
country were filled with articles congratulating
the party that TAFT AND FORAKER HAD
COMPROMISED THEIR DIFFERENCES.
Did that look as though Mr. Taft was NOT
willing to compromise with Foraker when For
aker was strong and powerful and had votes to
deliver? But let it be remembered that when
Mr. Taft consented that Senator Foraker should
preside at his Cincinnati meeting. THE STAND
ARD OIL LETTERS TO FORAKER HAD NOT
BEEN MADE PUBLIC.
But when Taft clasDed hands with Foraker
at Toledo and consented that Foraker should
preside at Taft's big meeting at Cincinnati, was
ho Ignorant of Senator Foraker's trust affilia
tions? We have it upon the authority of tho
president of the United States that TAFT WAS
NOT IGNORANT. If. on July 20, 1907, Taft
really wrote the letter attributed to him, then
MORE THAN ONE YEAR BEFORE THE
STANDARD OIL LETTERS WERE MADE
PUBLIC, TAFT KNEW OF FORAKER'S TRUST
AFFILIATIONS. Yet he joined In the Taft
Foraker harmony meet at Toledo, and later con
sented that Mr. Foraker should bo the presid
ing officer of the Taft meeting at Cincinnati.
But let it be remembered that when Taft
clasped hands with Foraker at Toledo and when
Taft consented that Foraker should preside at
Taft's Cincinnati meeting. THE STANDARD OIL
LETTERS TO FORAKER HAD NOT BEEN
MADE PUBLIC. '
Now that Foraker's relations with tho
Standard Oil trust have been made so clear
that the people may no longer bo deceived, tho
Taft-Foraker harmony is off; Mr. Foraker re
tires as chairman of Mr.- Taffs meeting; and
the president of tho United States, acting as
Mr. Taft's campaign manager, prints a letter
which shows if it shows anything at all that
Mr. Taft knew it all tho time; and It shows
also, in the light of his subsequent action, that
Taft was willing to compromise with Foraker
when Foraker was strong and powerful and had
the votes to deliver.
FORAKER'S SIN WAS IN BEING FOUND OUT
At the Toledo, Ohio, meeting Mr. Taft, in
the opening of his speech, spoke as follows: "It
is a great pleasure for me to meet the gentle
men who are here. The chairman of the meet
ing said I have filled sevornl offices nlmoBt with
out reward, but as Senator Foraker wlilspcrod
to mo, there are some who would accept them
on tho snino terms. It Is a groat pleasure for
me to be hero with Senator Forakor, because
when govomor ho gave mo what was really my
first chanco and took a good deal of risk in
putting a man of twenty-nlno years in tho su
perior court of Cincinnati. We are In a grent
electoral campaign and It is a. pleasure to think
in this presence that wo arc going to stand-in
tho campaign shoulder to shoulder with tho full
strength of tho republican pnrty."
Tho Independent (Now York), a Taft sup
porter, in its issue of September 1 0, In referring
to tho meeting between Messrs. Taft and For
aker, said:
"Tho meeting and tho addresses are re
garded as of political importance, showing that
there will be no foud in tho republican party In
Ohio, and that tho Taft wing of tho party will
favor tho re-election of Mr. Forakor to tho sen
ate, although Mr. Taft has consistently refused
to take, part In tho divisions in tho stato. Aftor
Mr. Taft and Mr. Foraker had spoken Sonator
Dick made nn address strongly supporting tho
ro-olection of Mr. Forakor."
Tho Indianapolis News (lnd. rep.) said:
"FORAKER IS REPUDIATED AFTER HE
WAS EXPOSED. COX IS STILL 'IN LINE' FOR
TAFT. So wo submit that the PRESIDENT'S
ARGUMENT DOES NOT REACH that TAFT'S
LETTER of a YEAR AGO DOES not MEET
the ISSUE. What the pnoplo want to know ia
what his RELATIONS WITH THESE MEN ARE
NOW, not what HE THOUGHT OF THEM IN
JULY, 1907."
THE INCREASING CONCERN OF THE PRESI
DENT I
Tho Cleveland (Ohio) Plain Dealer,'(ircd,
dora.) prints an editorial entitled "Increasing
concern of tho presidont." That 'editorial
follows: - ' t "
To fail to elect Mr. Taft would bo a ed
lamlty to tho country. President Roosevelt (6
Congressman McKinley.
Calamity, a grievous or widespread misfor
tune or disaster. Standard Dictionary.
President Roosevelt thinks it would bo a
"calamity to tho country" were Taft defeated
and Bryan elected to tho White House. So firm
Is he In this belief that ho writes a letter to the
public and addresses it to an Illinois member of
congress.
Nothing could be worse logic or poorer rea
soning than tills medieval plea that tho safety
of tho country depends on tho success of either
the one candidate or the othor. Business inter
ests of every section agree that the election of
Mr. Bryan would not mean disaster; regardless
of which of tho two leading candidates wins at
the polls, the country will move on just tho
same. The Bryan bugaboo was exploded twelve
years ago. Then tho president might have found
listeners to his plea that democratic success
meant "calamity;" but today the voter scoffs
at such statements and wonders what it is that
has so badly scared the occupant of tho Whit
House.
A week ago the president, In writing the
public through tho person of a Montana ranch
man, said he had "a peculiar Interest In the suc
cess" of Mr. Taft, but he said nothing about a
threatened "calamity." What occurred during
tho week to accentuate the Importance of tho
Issue In the presidential mind? In his next let
ter how will tho possible defeat of Mr. Taft bo
characterized? What is the superlative of
"calamity?" The president should be more
saving of his ammunition, lest it be exhausted
before the real battle begins.
What Is imperatively required is a revision
of the tariff such ns will modify the rates, or,
better still, place upon the free lint all foreign
goods that are the subject of domestic monopoly.
Philadelphia Ledger.
if
M
M
.
:.
!
m
4
u
