OCR Text |
Show H MONEY IN THE CAMPAIGN. H We have heard of the millions which were spent for Roosevelt H m the primaries prior to the Chicago convention. The reactionary M organs have been printing columns of denunciation based on the as- M sumption that millions were distributed. The charges were made H without any foundation in fact and 'for the purpose of directing at- 1 , tcntion away from the main issues of the campaign. m , Senator Joseph M. Dixon, director of the Progressive campaign H , issued a statement in which he declared that the campaign expenses H , of the Progressives before the Republican national convention H amounted to less than $160,000. Senator Dixon said that the amount H of money spent by the Progressive organization from its Washing- H j ton bureau during this period had heen grossly exaggerated. M "I read these stories about our expenses during the primary H campaign with considerable amusement at first," said Senator Hj j Dixon. "I knew they had been given circulation by the Republican H organization, but took them as a. joke until I discovered that certain editorial writers Avere using these false reports as the basis for some of their writings. "Outside of the money contributed by local leaders in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Massachusetts, .for the primary campaign in these four states, the entire Roosevelt prc-eonvention campaign cost less than $16,000. I think $155,000 would be a better figure for ; tho total. The Massachusetts Progressive leaders handled their own campaign. The same was true, to a greater or less extent, in the other states mentioned. However, wo furnished speakers and literature lit-erature in Ohio and in the other stales also. "Of this total of less than $160,000 that wc spent from our Washington headquarters over the entire nation, more than $50,000 was expended in printing and distribution of literature and for the running expenses of our Washington bureau. This covers everything every-thing except what was expended by local committees in the states already mentioned. "1 put just $100 into the South Dakota primary campaign. The total sum expended in the Nebraska primary campaign was $700. That does not include the expenses of special trains for Colonel Roosevelt which were paid from another fund. "Merely to show how ridiculous were the claims in this connection, con-nection, I wish to relate this incident: "At this time 1 went to the capitol one Saturday and drew on my personal salary account as a senator for sufficient money to pay the salaries of our steuoghaphers in the Washington bureau for that week. "An uncle of Gifford Pinchot, who is in Europe, made the largest lar-gest individual contribution to the pre-coiivcntion Roosevelt campaign cam-paign fund. "We did not get a single dollar for this fund from any corporation. corpora-tion. All contributions were from individuals. "Less than $20,000 was spent in Illinois during the primary I campaign. Of this sum $17,000 was spent for motor cars to get farmers to the polls at a time when they were loath to leave thein fields. "I consider that instead of having been a lavishly financed campaign, the pre-convention Roosevelt campaign was one of the most economical ever executed in the United States." Senator Dixon sent to Washington for the books showiug receipts re-ceipts and disbursements of the bureau which he operated previously to the Republican national convention, lie said ho would make the list of contributions public as soon as those books reach Chicago. |