Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 9, 1908)
gg'S!!!SZS55 ufwmmimmijmmm The Commoner. s VOLUME 8, NUMBER 39 When Senator Foraket Was "an Honorable Man" Under the headline, "Some Curious Circum stances'," the Washington (D. C.) Herald of September 80, prints the following: When one comes to unravel the recent Hearst-Foraker-Taft-Roosevelt matter, if it may be so called, some curious things come to light things which, arranged in sequence and consid ered calmly, are not without significance. To begin at' the beginning: On July 30, 1907, writing from Canada to Mr. A. I. Vorys, we find Xir.Taft saying, with respect to a joint indorsement suggested by some Ohio friends of himself and Senator Foraker, the following: "In respect to one inquiry of yours 1 wish to express myself with as much emphasis as possible, that is, whether I would object to a compromise resolution which shall include an indorsement of myself for the presidency and Senator Foraker for the senatorship. In my judgment it would be not only a great mistake something more. It would be accepted neces sarily as a compromise on my behalf, and there fore, with my acquiescence, or at least with the acquiescence of my friends, for whose action I am more or less responsible. It would totally misrepresent my position." On Monday, September 21, 190S, we find the president of the United States saying: "Senator Foraker has been a leader among those members of Congress of both parties who have resolutely opposed the great policies of in ternal reform for which the administration has made itself responsible." From these two statements, it can not be doubted that Mr. Taft repudiated Mr. Foraker privately over a year before the president made that repudiation public and coupled with it his own personal statement Indicating that he, too, & 0 had drawn strongly adverse conclusions concern ing Senator Foraker, at least as far back as the last meeting of congress. On September 3, 1908, we find Messrs. Taft and Foraker publicly meeting, somewhat osten tatiously and with a great flourishing of trum pets and beating of drums, at Toledo, Ohio, the occasion being a pre-arranged "reconciliation" affair. At this meeting the republican presiden tial nominee is quoted as saying of Senator Foraker: "It is a pleasure to be here with Senator Foraker, because, when governor, he gave me what was really my first chance, and took a good deal of risk in putting a man of twenty nine years on the superior court of Cincinnati. We are in a great electoral campaign, and it is a pleasure to think that we are going to stand in the campaign, shoulder to shoulder, with' the full strength of the republican party." On Friday, September 11, 1908, Senator Foraker called on Mr. Taft in Cincinnati. After they met, Mr. Taft is reported by a prominent news agency as saying, in response to an in quiry: "Certainly I shall call on Senator For aker for assistance in the campaign, should occasion require." . Reference to the files of any newspaper carrying the political news of the day will dis close the fact that a further Taft-Foraker "joint appearance was planned for Tuesday, Septem ber 22, by the National League of Republican clubs. This was to have been a "love feast;" Senator Foraker to preside, and Mr. Taft to make a speech. A few days before this "love feast" was to occur, however, Mr. Hearst threw his bomb. into the republican camp disclosed Mr. Foraker's con nection with the Standard Oil company, and .cre ated the greatest political excitement of the cam paign thus far. Thereupon, Mr. Foraker wrote to Mr. John Hays Hammond, president of the National League of Republican clubs, and to Mr. Taft himself, withdrawing from the proposed program. Mr. Taft accepted the embarrassing situation in silence; the president issued a blis tering statement denouncing Foraker, and pub lished the year-old Vorys letter, heretofore re ferred to. This sequence of events 1s highly interest ing and presents food for thought. Incidentally, it suggests a few questions First Does anybody believe that the Na tional League of Republican club's program -would have been altered had. not Mr. Hearst stepped into the game at the time he did? Second Was it not rather queer 'iat Mr. Taft, directly, and the president, inferentially, would have agreed to either the Toledo meetiug or the National League "love feast. if both gen tlemen had meant two statements herein quoted? If both knew, one at least a year ago and the other at least since the last meeting of congress, the unworthiness of any sort of compromise cr apparent compromise with Foraker, why was the Toledo meeting, or the National League meet ing, ever tolerated, in thought or in deed? And in view of he private Vorys letter of 1907, were not Mr. Taft's Toledo remarks noted herein rath er peculiar? Third Doesn't it look as if Mr. Hearst's startling revelations alone actually precipitated the repudiation of Foraker, and headed off a great sacrifice of principle or further sacrifice upon the part of Mr. Taft and the president? Was hot the public damnation of Foraker really forced, rather than willingly megaphoned to the world? Gage and Fowler oh Guaranteed Deposits Lyman J. Gage, former secretary of the treasury, may be regarded as sufficiently "con servative? to obviate fears that he would be "unsafe" In his banking views. Before' the house committee on banking and currency In Washington Mr. Gage discussed national finances and particularly the national bank. He sought an illustration of the idea he was expressing, which in general was In support of the guar antee plan, and like many others found it in the Walsh failure in Chicago. After explaining how .the clearing-house banks took over the assets of the failed institu tion, guaranteed all depositors, and prevented runs on other banks, Mr. Gaqe said: ' ".Well, they learned another lesson and they adopted another principle, a principle pro vided for in this (the Fowler) bill. By the vote and voluntary compliance of all the members of the Clearing House association, they au thorized the clearing house at any time and at stated periods to act upon its own volition and on its own account, and for the information of Uie clearing house committee itself to have full, complete and comprehensive investigation of each member of the association, and not only of each member, but of every Institution that carries the name of bank over it that is cleared or represented in the clearing house by any clearing house bank; and I can tell you as a safe prophecy that -we are at the' end of disas trous failure in the city of Chicago by clearing house banks, since this regime has come in. I am told that Kansas City has the same things and other cities will eventually adopt it." Charles N. Fowler, republican, of New Jer sey, chairman of the house committee on bank ing and currency, appears In. the Congressional Record with a house speech in support of his bill which provided for guarantee of bank de posits. He specially answered the assertion that such a guarantee would induce reckless banking, saying: "Mr. Chairman, -we are occasionally met with the statement that guarantee of deposits would lead to unsound banking. Can you think of a banker, because Ik had insured his deposits, going into the directors' room and say ing: 'Gentlemen, we have insured our de posits today. Now let us proceed to make some rotten loans?' "Is it not possible that it will occur to those directors that their losses must come out of their profits, out of their reserves out of their capital, and out of their reputations? Will they not realize that they can get nothing out of the guarantee until the last dollar of their cap ital, surplus and profits has been, wiped out, and stockholders have been .assessed .double the amount of their stock? ' l' "Until their reputations have neen injured, if not ruined, and possibly gome of them have been started on th5 road to state prison? Can anybody think that any board of directors of any bank would be less solieitious, anxious and honest and wise after they had guaranteed de posits than they were before? "I assert again, after the most mature de liberation, that if there is one reason for in suring life and home, there are more than a thousand good reasons more than ten thou sand good reasons why the depositors of the bankiug institutions of the United States should be insured." These two men have offered valuable con tributions to the discussion of the proposed guarantee of bank deposits. Mr. Gage has set forth the present trend of bankers towards a closer watchfulness over all Institutions which accept the people's money in trust, and has in dicated the exact means whereby, under a guar antee law, bankers woxtld do as now they do maintain an association empowered to look sharplv into financial concerns which seem to be departing from sound methods. John E. Lathrop in Des Moines (la.) Daily Tribune. TRUST AFFILIATIONS OF THE REPUBLICAN TREASURE! At New York City, October 2, Norman E. Mack, chairman of the democratic national com mittee, issued the following statement: "The trust and corporation affiliations of George R. Sheldon, treasurer of the republican national committee for the past ten years, make interesting reading, in view of the recent de velopments in the campaign. "- ".I wish to recall in this connection that because of thee very affiliations of his Governor Odell in 1902 refused to permit the party lead ers to put Mr. Sheldon in nomination for lieu tenant governor. Governor Odell at that time declared that he would no accept the renomina tlon for head of the state ticket if Sheldon were named as his running mate. But while the re publican party has refused to put Mr. Sheldon's name on the ballot for a public office It has for the identical reasons for this refusal selected him for its campaign fund collector. "This can not be denied. Most of the cor porations with which Mr. Sheldon Is Identified are capitalized for millions. How mm h of their stocks is of the liquid variety can be easily as certained. Yet Mr. Roosevelt has defended him and his resignation was not demanded when Mr. Dupont was invited to step down and out Mr. Dupont was only identified with one trust while Mr. Sheldon is at the present time inti mately .identified with no less than seventeen prominent financial concerns. One of them the Bethlehem Steel company, does not emplov union labor and has opposed the organization of its employes for the past sixteen years. Mr. Shel don is a director of that compauy. He is also treasurer and director of the North American company, capitalized for $50,000,000, the con cern known as the 'mystery of Wall Street.' "It is but a few years back since he was prominently identified with the whisky trust; A glance at his connections with the various companies for the past ten years will explain tersely the -reason of his present position. No further comment of mine is necessary." The corporations named by Mr. Mack in clude railway, industrial and financial concerns hero and elsewhere. Chairman Hitchcock of the republican na tional committee was shown Chairman Mack's attack on Treasurer Sheldon, but declined to make any statement. i O w A COMPLIMENT The.courteous poise of Mr. Bryan's reply to Mr. Roosevelt Is indicative of many things in the Nebraskan's make-up that account for b s popularity nud high standing throughout this country. Washington Herald (Ind.), O 5 ? j In the meanwhile Uncle Henry Watterson is proudly flaunting a vindication as to that al leged Cleveland letter. v A ,w- Hia.Afafcr t -g.yym t mfa. vtAjfcEkl.lt.i -tf4 A.tfTfrjirfiM m u M' iMHt"'- miiriiiwf