Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Dec. 18, 1908)
T DECEMBER 18, 19 Oa Ing. The Panama story was used in' the cam paign for political reasons solely. The only thing that gave it political value in the eyes of those who used it was the fact that the story, as printed, carried the names of a brothor.of the republican candidate for the presidency and of a brother-in-law of the president. The infer ence was plain enough. It was that Theodore Roosevelt and William H. Taft had used their influence as high officials of the United States government to help near relatives in looting the treasury at Washington. That was the meat .of the story. If the names of Douglas Robin son and Charles P. Taft had not been Included in it, flimsy as it was, the lying yarn would never have been used by the World, the Indianapolis News and other papers, which for one reason or another, wanted to defeat Mr. Taft and dis credit Mr. Roosevelt. "The World is trying to dodge the issue. It wants to be relieved of the responsibility of try ing to drag the names of Mr. Robinson and Mr. Taft into its made to order mess of scandal and slime. Both the World and the Indianapolis News are crying 'let in the light.' We thorough ly agree with them. But after a little time has passed, after the most desperate effort of the cornered World and News have produced all the evidence they can, an apology will be in order from those newspapers." WHO GOT THE MONEY? (From an editorial in New York World.) Charles P. Taft seems to regard the World's challenge of Mr. Roosevelt's misstatements of fact as a personal attack upon him. If full publicity of the facts about the Panama trans actions implicates any of the Tafts, he has only himself to blame. William Nelson Cromwell is primarily re sponsible for the bringing of William H. Taft into this matter. It was Mr. Cromwell who conferred with Mr. Taft at the Hotel Manhattan the day before Mr. Taft went to Oyster Bay, and who met him again on his return. It was Mr. Cromwell who visited Mr. Taft at Hot Springs and secured the appointment of George R. Sheldon as treasurer of the republican na tional committee. It wa.s Mr. Cromwell who undertook to manage the republican campaign. But it was not Mr. Cromwell Who replied to the question "Who got the money?" with "liar," "abominable . falsehood," "not merely scandalous but Infamous." Not Mr. Cromwell but Mr. Roosevelt said: . "The. United States did not pay a cent of the $40,000,000 to any American citizen. The government paid this $40,000,000 direct to the French government. , The United States gov ernment has not the slightest knowledge as to the particular individuals among whom the French government distributed the same. So far as I know there was no syndicate." Mr. Cromwell's testimony before the sen ate committee in 19GG contradicts each of these statements of Mr. Roosevelt. To .these contradictions in the senate record is now added the emphatic contradiction of Sen ator Millard, of Nebraska, the republican chair man of the committee on inter-oceanic canals, who says: "The French government had nothing to do with the sale of the canal property. About the only man who had anything to do with that was William Nelson Cromwell. The money was paid to J. P. Morgan & Co., instead of to the French, government, as stated by Mr. Roosevelt. None of it was paid to the French government, so far as I know, and the French government did not have the distribution of it." Another contradiction of Mr. Roosevelt's statement that "the government paid this $40. 000,000 direct to the French government" is found in the checks to J. P. Morgan & Co., and by them indorsed, which are on file in the treas ury department. Solicitor-General Hoyt in an inspired de fense says that the money was paid . to the liquidator, M, Gautron, and that this was pay ment to the French government. According to Cromwell's testimony only $25,000,000 of the $40,000,000 was paid to the liquidator of the de Lessees company. Even had It all been paid to M. Gautron, that would be no more payment to the French government than a payment to the receivers of the Metropolitan Traction is payment to the government of the United States. The ..old de Lesseps company had failed and a receiver had been appointed. -There was ho market for the property and the claims were selling at a few cents on the dollar. Somebody bought up many of them. Then Mr. Cromwell, The Commoner acting for the now Panama Canal company, sold fhi?T0ruy ,otoJh 0ld Panftma Cnnal company L 2. r nIt0d Statcs for M0.000.000 and paid the do Lesseps receiver $25,000,000 for what cost the United States $40,000,000 SVSr Q,3 V,10 World'8 information goes, none of the brothers of Mr. William II. Taft was in the original syndicate. The executors or Senator Gorman and of Senator Ilanna might Xurnish information about the original syndlca tors. So might J. P. Morgan & Co., Douglas Robinson and William Nelson Cromwell. If any of Mr. Taft's brothers were syndicators thoy carao in later. A public Investigation by congress to find out who got the money is an imperative necessity. THE INDIANAPOLIS NEWS' REPLY The Indianapolis News, whose editor, De layan Smith, was attacked by Mr. Roosevelt, prints the following editorial: "Disregarding the president's abuse and disclaiming any desire or ambition to compete with him in the language of invective, we never theless feel that it is both our right and our duty to give the facts of our course in relation to the Panama canal charges. "In the first place, it Is remarkable that the criticisms of the News, which wore based largely on the statements of the New York World, criticisms which were made over and over again during the campaign, were utterly ignored till today. The only man who paid any attention to them was Mr. Charles P. Taft, who did deny that he was in any way related to the affair. We had no word from the president or Mr. Taft. The other men, such as Crom well and Morgan, who were believed to have full information In regard to the business, said nothing. "But now, after the campaign Is over, the president rushes Into print through his familiar way, and says, with his usual violence and viru lence, that the News Is a liar. Now what are the facts? "The first Is that the News Is far from being the only paper that ventured to suggest that the silence of all concerned only served to strengthen the suspicion, which was generally held, that all was not right. The Now York World was the original authority. The Chicago Journal was quite as vigorous as was this paper In comments. Unless our memory is at fault, the Louisville Courier-Journal was not wholly unimpressed by the charges. "The charges wore indeed repeated over and over again, and toward the close of the cam paign we, as did others, drew what seemed to be the necessary and inevitable conclusion that silence was practically tantamount to -confession. But now wo have the president's denial, which is not made till it is too late for any votes to be affected or influenced by a discussion of the subject. "And what does his denial amount to? He only says that the money was not paid to any syndicate or any American, citizens, but to the trench government. He does not know to whom that government paid the money. The president says: " 'The fact has been officially published again and again that the government paid $40,000,000 and that it paid this $40,000,000 direct to the French government, getting the receipt of tho liquidator appointed by the French government to receive the same. The United States has not the slightest knowledge as to the particular in dividuals among whom the French government distributed the sum. This was the business of the French government. The mere supposi tion that any American received from the French government a 'rake-off' is too absurd to be discussed. It is an abominable falsehood, and it is a slander, not against the American government, but' against the French govern ment.' "The president, in one breath, says that It Is absurd to suppose that any American got a rake off, and in another, that neither he nor the gov ernment knows to whom the French govern ment paid the money. If neither the president nor our government knows who got the money, the president can not know but that some Amer ican citizen got some of It. This is the sort of denial that tho country is asked to accept. The French government could pay the money only to the men holding the securities of the old Panama company. That is what it did. "The president says that he does not know who those men were. And ypt, possessing no knowledge on the subject, he" denies absolutely, as he confesses without knowledge, that any of t 3fr thh "AminflitUll? "" Wny,,nt0 Amor'nn Pockolfl. Again It Is remembered that n prominent Frenchman, closely connected with the biS SI practically admitted thrft some Amorlcani Tot wr0on0lnyifnn(rBft,d ".V" ,ho C0U,(I e "" Wn wrong In it. From all of which wo concludo that tho subject Is more than over one Into which congress should Inquire. "But tho president says that no records woro turned over to this government early In JunS ast, and that tho last records that came Into possession of this government wore received n May 1901. But thin charge was m ado by those who Investigated tho affair, and they na Id innl , y )V.T unaWo to KOt acco t tho final records which wore turned over to our govor -mont when tho transaction was finally closod In Juno of tho present year. "Our offense consisted solely In accepting this statement as true. It was made on roipo ,- ?ilvaUV!f0?ty Um! hn8 novor b00n billed t Mnfnmo..J n. 'f. nnyt,,,nK 'BmndaloilB' Or infamous' In this tho scandal and infamy do not attach to tho Nows. ISvon the denial made wm !iCl0,U ,n ,,clm.,f of h,B Mother-in-law Jrnn mT0 hcfn moro ,,nI,rolve had it como from that gentleman himself. "As illustrating tho president's peculiar method of dealing with matters of this kind wo may refer to his reiteration in this remark1 m vctt?ro0f V18 den,ftl of th0 charge o? tho Now York Sun In regard to his granting a fran chise to a Standard Oil company In Oklahoma. Ho prints his denial, but has not bno word to .any of tho Sun's reiteration of the charge Yot this reiteration wns made by the Sun In Ub Ihhuo of November 20, or ilvo days boforo tho presi dent dated his letter. "The Nows took tho only course that could have boon taken by n jmfwr whoso policy It Is to print tho news and to tell tho truth about it. The charges woro publicly made by a re sponsible paper made niany times during the campaign and no attention whatevor was paid to thorn by tho president or the men (oxcept Charles P. Taft) said to bo Involved. And ovdn now the president openly admits that he has not evidence In his possession, has no knowledge on which It is possible to base a denial. Ho does not know who got tho monoy, and yet ho says positively that no American got any of Jt. "The Nows has not tho slightest desire to misrepresent the facts nor to make unwarranted inferences. It had no purpose or motive but to servo tho best Interests of the people by pub lishing what It believed to be pertinent and time ly Information relating to a matter of public Importance. It repeatedly expressed surprise that all the men (except Charles P. Taft), whoso names were mentioned in connection with tho charges continued to Ignore them. "On a review of all tho circumstances as they presented themselves at the tlmo, we con fess that we are unable to see what other course the Nows could consistently have pursued. As for the president's characteristic personal at tack on Mr, Dolavan Smith, one of tho owners of tho News, that is a question in which tho public can have no legitimate interest. But the canal question Is a public question. It la one into which congress should Inquire." V. . AN INTERNATIONAL INQUIRY A Washington dispatch to the Omaha World-Herald says: "Democratic senators and house leaders have about decided upon their policy concern ing the demand for Investigation on the Panama canal fiscal charges. It is believed that no In vestigation would be worth while which should not be International In scope. To have access to tho records of the war department Is thought useless unless it can be supplemented by an inquiry. In Paris. To this end it Is thought that this government would have to ask the co-operation of tho French government and secure the privilege of employing tho process of the French courts in order to compel people of Franco to testify. Whether this can be done Is not yet known. The situation Is believed to be unpre cedented at least no precedent has been found for It. The co-operation of the French govern ment Is considered doubtful, In view of the fact that France has once been torn by a great canal scandal. However, it is expected by Senator Culberson and other democrats that as soon as these aspects can be investigated a resolution, properly framed will be introduced, probably calling on the war department for papers and on tho state department for co-operation. Mean while the Rainey Resolution on the same subject Introduced In the house yesterday will be al lowed to take its course." .m