New-York tribune., 1904-10-11
cUNyEES'S PLIGHT.

Attorney General Cunneen, nominated by the
Democratic State Convention to succeed hlnl-
self is buried deep IN hole Of his own digging.
Having been compelled to show cause why, II
the charges of Republican maladministrarion
we're true he too should not be condemned
for wrongs which. as the chief legal officer OF
the State, he had done nothing to prevent or
redress. he issued g feeble defensive statement
in which, however. at one point be ventured to
take the aggressive He declared that against
his earnest opposition and his official vote an
allowance of S1S,61s had been Improperly
granted TO the Furnaceville Iron Company cn
a canal contract under the S9,OOOOOO improve
ment scheme. His political supporters, at once
perceiying that this was the only specific asser-
ton in the Attorney Generals response to the
question of his own fidelity which possessed
shred of importance have been eager to make
the most of it. and accordingly have been de-
manding an answer day after day
They have now got their answer. 1t comes
from Nathan L. Miller who was State Con-
troIler and member of the Canal Board while
this particular claim was under adjudication,
and is now Justice Of the Supreme Court in
the With Judicial District. Justice NIiller's
character is unimpeachable. and Democrats
wi. not insanely attempt to impeach it. for he
is the Democratic as we'll as the Republican
candidate for the place on the bench which he
now holds by appointment. The cold statement
of facts taken from the record with which Jus
tice Miller exposes and refutes Attorney Gen
eral Cunneen is published elsewhere in this
issue, and we do not need to recapitulate it in
this place just now. 1t is sufficient for the i'm
mediate purpose Of this article to say that it is
complete and crushing, and to invite Mr.. Gun
mems attention TO this predatory observation
by Justice Miller:
Cunneen which Rave had. cannot believe that
he has deliberately falsifed, but prefer TO be
lieve that he has made a mistake as a result Of
undue haste. and that in an attempt 70 meet a
supposed immediate necessity of supplying a
specific charge to support a general one, par
tisan zeal has caused him 70 rely on memory,
which is often treacherous, instead OF the actual
record.
That is a benevolent view of the case. 1t is
the view which The Tribune prefers TO take.
But we must tell Attorney General Cunneen
that It does not relieve him from the wretched
plight in which he put himself. Presumably,
without deliberate intention Of faIsifying the
record. he relied on treacherOus memory. Byt
that is precisely what he had no right TO do.
He was not merely bound 10 refrain from con
scious Misrepresentation. Having resolved to
make a grave accusation against political oppo-
nents he was under the strongest possible oh
legation, as a citizen and especially as a public
officer dealing with a transaction in which he
was officially concerned, to know that he was
telling the truth. If now. with penitence and
humility. he confesses TO a monstrous blunder
blindly committed. and makes every effort 10
atone for the wrong which he has done he viii
not wholly forfeit the respect with which he
has been generally regarded But if he hesi-
tates and shuffles avoids the issue or takes
refuge in silence, he will stand disgraced in the
opinion Of all honorable men for the rest of his
life