Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1891-01-29
A BATTLE OF WORDS.
Debate Upon the House Investigating
Committees Reports.

Debate Upon the House Investigating
Committees Reports.
HARTFORD, January 29.-The house
convened at IL o'clock this morning.
Immediately after the opening Repre-
sentative Callahan of New Haven took
the floor and for three quarers of an
hour spoke in opposition to the report
of the republican majority of the house
investigating committee. He was fol-
lowed by John Addison Porter of Pom,
fret, who spoke at length in favor of
the report. Then Mr. Judd of Litchfield
argued against the report, and
Was was followed by Mr. , Wood ,ro Of
a republican standpoint Hobart
Hotchkiss of New Haven followed Mr.
Wood. Tomorrow Judge Gr;swold
will speak in favor and Mr. Walker
against the report, when it is expected Il
vote will be taken.
Nothing whatever was done at the
morning session of the senate. Imme-
diately after coming together an ad-
iournment was taken uni . O'Clock.
When the senate convened at 2 o'clock
| a motion was made from the republican
side of the house that the journal
be changed. This sam. motion
has been introduced at each session
since General Merwin entered the cham
ber 1t was of course voted down by a
strictly party vote.
The senate then adjourned until to-
morrow.
Late this afternoon it was decided to
take vote on the report at noon next
Tuesday. This decision was arrived at
after considerable discussion. the re-
publicans wanting to cut off debate and
vote upon the matter to morrow.
At 3 o'clock the programme was
changed and Judge Griswold, who was
to speak tomorrow, took the floor.
REPRESENTATIVE ROOTS SPEECH.
Representative Root of Waterbury
opened the democratic case of the COVER
norship, yesterday afternoon, by saying
that if no other expeditions against the
treasury were meditated, he would like
to say something about the report of the
non committal committee, which was
rather an apology for not making re-
port. He had heard, with qualification
from the other side, that one member
on the democratic side had been chosen
lord high chancellor, but he could not
discover in the report any other finding.
No intelligent action could be had on
such a report. Behind it all, however.
is the greater question as to what is
right. The first and second days re-
ferred to in the constitution were de-
clared to be the calendar days, and the
point was made that the constitution
contemplated only an examination of
the fair list and of the face of the re-
turns. Nothing more could be done i'll
a calendar day. Moreover, 1t Is Chlet
Justice Buffers opinion that the trainers
of that constitution intended to place
matters relating to the election of state
officers beyond the reach of future legis-
latures. The general assembly has
hedged around those provisions of the
constitution, and have prescribed
laws regarding elections. Under those
laws action must be had. They cannot
be changed now to cover last Novem-
ber's election. Those laws make 40 pro-
vision for an appeal from the decisions
Of the moderators. Those decisions
must be final, just the same as the de
cisions of boards of registrati IN are
final. And there was no fraud in those
decisions, the errors, if any, being errors
of Judgment. That excess of 20 for the
democratic candidates in Norwich was
IA clerical error, and it is balanced by
like excess of 10 in Milford for the re-
publican candidates. The allegations of
irregularities are numerous. We have
the decision of Judge Hall that ballots
on which the name of a candidate for
Judge of probate was not printed, are
illegal. Yet 800 or 1000 of these bal
lots have been counted. 1t is none of
our business, however, whetnef tney
should be thrown out or not. We must
abide by the returns. The mode rators
did their duty. Their judgment
appears, if their specific reasons do
not. Perhaps thousands of ballots were
illegal, but our safety is to take the re-
turns as they come to US, not relying on
human testimony unreliable at this late
day. If you are to go back of the re-
turns, why not go back of the boards OF
registration, or of the records of births,
to know if all who voted were 21 years
old? AS to the point about preserving
the ballot boxes for six months, is not
the inference just as reasonable, that
the purpose is to put them within the
call of the senate, which is to Judge of
the qualifications of its own members
NOW as to Mr. Staub,' said Mr. Root. in
conclusion, approaches have been
made to certain men to put them Ill
office if they would promise to do GER
tain things. The proper reply they
made was that, if they went into office
they would take the oath to support
the constitution and to perform their
duties according to law. If they failed,
the law of Connecticut is powerful
enough to set them right. Are the
gentlemen afraid to declare Nicholas
Staub comptroller? Is it proper to keep
him out if he is elected p