The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-12-03
BAILEY AND KELLY.

BAILEY AND KELLY.
The state treasury of Kansas is not
only corruptly and grossly misman-
aged, according to the official reports
of the state accountant and the Moxey
Accounting company. but its officer, T.
T. Kelly. is an impudent rascal.
The state accountant has proven the
rascality, the action of the state treas
urer in refusing to pay the governors
maintenance bills proves the impu-
dence.
The honor of Governor Bailey will
not be affected whether Kelly gains
or loses his point.
The maintenance fund was appro-
priated by the legislature with the I'M
Outstanding that the governor would
use it for just such purposes as he has
used it. But to make himself abso-
lutely safe, Governor Bailey took the
only action he could take, namely, to
ask Attorney General Coleman wheth-
er it was right or not right for him to
use the fund in paying the bills in
question covering the maintenance of
his official household. He said it was
right. His advice to the governor
should naturally be taken. The auditor
of state took the same precaution and
the attorney general told the auditor
he should honor the bills.
The state treasurer could have done
the same thing, but it is conclusive that
if the attorney general has advised the
governor that the bills are all right
and the auditor that the bills are all
right, that the state treasury can
honorably cash the vouchers covering
these bills. At any rate, Mr.. Kelly did
this month after month.
1t was not until the state accountant,
appointed by Governor Bailey. exposed
the corruption in the state treasury that
the official of the latter department,
not deigning an answer to certain plain
charges of corruption, set about to
throw dust in the eyes of the governor
and of the public by this impudent pro-
cedure.
If Kelly had held up the governors
first bills, as did the governor h1mself
and the auditor, awaiting a decision
by the attorney general, there would
have been some sense in the action.
Now it is simply retaliation. The testi-
mony of Assistant Auditor Nation yes
terday in a deposition showed that the
for the maintenance of
various state institutions are made just
and that it has always been custo-
mary to pay the living expenses of the
inmates, of the employees, and of the
officers out of said maintenance ap-
In this connection another strange
thing appears, and that is this. If a
newspaper defends a bad man or
a bad cause the newspaper
will be condemned by such men as ].
w. Gleed and F. Dumont Smith, and
rightfully so. In this case F. Dumont
Smith and J. w. Gleed are defending
a bad man, T. T. Kelly, and are cham
pioning a bad cause.
Why should we not condemn J. w.
Gleed and F. Dumont Smith, just as
they would condemn a newspaper I'M
der similar circumstances?
Why should there be one code of |
for a lawyer and another code |
for a newspaper?
1t is the State Journals opinion that |
T. T. Kelly, J. w. Gleed and F. Du-
mont Smith are all in a bad business |
n this case. Mr.. Kelly is not doing |
his thing, through himself or by his |
attorneys, with any motive of good |
or the state, but merely to try to vim |
iicate his own rascality by besmirch- |
ng the conduct and character of the |
governor of the state-a thing neither |
lie nor his attorneys can accomplish by |
he method in question whatever the |
verdict may be on the maintenance |
und.
Attorney General Coleman has more |
1t stake in this case than has Governor |
Bailey. There can be no question |
whether or not the governor acted hon |
'rably, but the courts decision will de- |
ermine whether or not the attorney
general was competent OF incompetent, |
light or wrong, in the legal and official |
ldYica he gave Covarror. RaiIe,r