McCormick Tells Why He Is Against Taft.

New York Times 100 years ago today, July 16, 1912:
Head of the Bull Moose Party in Illinois Gives His Reasons for His Activity for Roosevelt
Special to The New York Times.
    CHICAGO, July 14.— As previously noted, Medill McCormick is the head and front of the Bull Moose movement in Illinois. He is Chairman of the Illinois Committee, or man of all work, at least, charged with the hard task of changing the political status of this State and recanting the beliefs of a lifetime. Medill is kin to the McCormick Theological Seminary and the International Harvester concern, the basis of which was laid by Cyrus, when he was a quiet and unassuming citizen of the Scotch-Irish farming type in the country round about Lexington, Va. He is working like a beaver for what he calls "the cause," without wages and is "finding himself."
    When he was asked yesterday by somebody down in Missouri for a little financial assistance he made it very clear that he was not "in funds." for this purpose or for any purpose outside of Illinois territory, and that application would have to be made to a man by the name of Davis of New York. Why he did not suggest that Dr. Lyman Abbott might be inclined to "pass around the hat" for the relief of Missouri cannot he explained by any one not in the confidence of the Strictly Honest Party.
    Yesterday Medill was hard at work at Progressive headquarters here, but today he has had an all-day seance with his brother and a few friends, his brother and friends being of the Taft strain of Republicans and quite satisfied with both the good intentions and the work accomplished by the President.

* * *

    Before he left town yesterday afternoon a fine body of questions was submitted to Medill in this form:
    "Why did you do it?"
    "Now that you have done it, what are you going to do with it?"
    "What do you expect to accomplish by it?"
    "What is the situation?"
    "What States will Roosevelt carry?"
    "Who will run for Vice President with him?"
    "How does it happen that all who induced Roosevelt to go into it, quit after he got into it, excepting, of course, the few faithful who are sticking to him?"
    "How much has it cost?"
    "Where did it come from?"
    "How much more will it cost, and where is it coming from? "
    "What will be the gain to the country from it?"
    "What, will the electors nominated on Republican tickets in different States do in the Electoral College?"
    "What, specifically, are the objections to Taft?"
    "Does the movement mean the end of the Republican Party?"
    "How many States have been organized for Roosevelt?"
    In explaining why he did it, McCormick replied: "Because Taft, who was elected as a progressive, proved to be a reactionary. He violated his pledges made during his campaign at Cincinnati and Milwaukee to secure a reduction of the tariff. He reversed himself on the income tax, to which he had committed himself during the campaign. In the same way he proved he was a reactionary in the Ballinger-Pinchot controversy. The purpose of the Roosevelt-Pinchot conservation policy was to retain for the people the title of the great National resources of the country, permitting their development under leases or on a royalty basis.
    "It was Ballinger's policy permanently to alienate those resources to private owners. But the most flagrant reflection on the President, was the Wickersham Railway bill. When the first conferences on the bill were held at the White House Senator Cummins was invited to take part in them, but after this first conference, at which he was present, he was never asked to return. Then followed a series of' executive caucuses at which there were present not only officers of the Government but the Presidents of great railroads.
     "When the bill emerged from the Attorney General's office and was sent to Congress it had been strangely changed since Senator Cummins had last seen it. It had become a bill in the interest of the railroads and not of the people. It created the Inter-State Commerce Court, (which now by injunctions blocks the action of the Inter-State Commerce-Commission,) and among other things permitted a controlling ownership by one railroad of the stock of a potential competitor. In short, it legalized railroad monopoly, without giving to the Government any adequate power to regulate. As drafted it would have licensed the railroads to fix on the country an intolerable burden of taxation on all the commodities they carried, from grand pianos to thumb tacks, through the charging of unreasonable rates.
    "The President, who would not interfere with the tariff during its confederation by Congress, issued orders that the Railroad bill should pass without amendment. By coercion, attempted through the withdrawal of Federal patronage, he sought to muzzle Congressmen and Senators, to deprive them of the right of debate and amendment. But, supported by public opinion, the progressive Republicans in the two houses of Congress defied Mr. Taft, and amended the bill in the interests of the countless, voiceless shippers and consumers of the country.
    "In the face of the opposition of the President they so changed his Railroad bill that it lifted from the shoulders of the little shippers and consumers and
placed on the shoulders of the great railroads the burden of proving the justice and necessity for an increase in railroad rates. That amendment alone, which Mr. Taft fought against, has done more than anything else to make possible Government control of the great railroads.
    "The progressive Republicans, who opposed the President on these and other grounds, were confirmed in their Judgment when the campaign began and the President's managers were seen to be Smoot, Crane, Penrose, Guggenheim, Tawney, and McKinley, and these gentlemen immorally and illegally seated enough delegates who were not chosen by the people to nominate Mr. Taft."

* * *

    In reply to the question now that he had done it, what was he going to do with it, McCormick declared with, every appearance of being serious that "this movement is going to result in a permanent powerful Progressive Party. It will mean, certainly, that when this campaign is over the number of reactionary Republicans elected to office will be so few that their future influence in American politics will be nil.
    "My choice for Vice President," said McCormick, "Is Hiram Johnson of California. He does not want it, and this does not mean that he will take it."
    As for the original Governors, on whose
invitation Mr. Roosevelt threw his hat into the ring, McCormick said:
    Glasscock has not quit, Bass has not quit, Osborn has come back into the fold.
Johnson is still very much there. Hadley is against Taft. Stubbs is for Roosevelt. Deneen never signed for Roosevelt. Aldrich has not quit.
    "In Illinois the entire campaign has cost less than any campaign of which I have any knowledge ever run in this State. As to the number of States organized for Roosevelt, there are organizations in New England which already look to the nomination of full State tickets, excepting in Maine and New Hampshire, where for the time being there is an armed truce with regard to State offices, but not with regard to Presidential Electors.
    "Pennsylvania, West Virginia, North Carolina, New York and Maryland are organized. Indiana and Michigan are organized.
    "Illinois, Iowa and Missouri are organizing. In the trans-Mississippi States, the Roosevelt people, in many instances, have control of the regular organizations. In other States, like Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado, organisations are now being perfected.
    I know, for example, that calls have been issued in Texas, Alabama and Louisiana. Florida, New Mexico and Arizona have organized and the call has been issued in Nevada. Georgia and South Carolina are States where, I think, nothing has been done."

* * *

    McCormick takes a rose-colored view of the situation, perhaps, but it is certain that there is a very definite and pronounced feeling here for Roosevelt without any-substantial cause, so far as the natives have noted.
    There is rejoicing at the fate that has overtaken Lorimer, quiet voters saying to-day that his expulsion from the Senate has removed from the politics of the State
one of the worst influences that has ever been known.
    The scandalous statement has been encouraged that Taft was in some measure responsible for Lorimer's long fight for his political lite, but absolutely no reason is annexed for such a belief. In the politics of this State money has always played a rather important part. How the State would go if all the sources of supply should be cut off from those who claim that they are serving the State by paying strict attention to their duties as citizens it is impossible to tell. Indeed, it is impossible to think.
    In communities where a man's vote is regarded as an asset instead of a liability (see the testimony in the Lorimer case) it is difficult to think of such communities as being moved in local political undertakings by other than somewhat selfish considerations.
               J. C. H.