The morning journal-courier., 1908-09-15
THE POWER OF REASONING.

tHE foNEh UT HEAsONING.
 Il is not at all with the idea of dis putting the obvious right of the Hart ford Times to hold to its own view of the Lilley escapade in Washington that we express mild surprise at what appears to us to be a weakened power .of reasoning out question to It's log ical conclusion Those who have studl- ed the report of the investigating com mittee with the greatest care, and who have been free from prejudice In reaching a decision, have decided eith- CT that he was an abused man or a foolish adventurer.
 The Times takes neither of these po- stions. IL believes that he acted in good faith in besmirchine the reputa tions of men counted by his own col leagues as good as himself, but that he conducted his case unwisely But his case was not sufficiently prepared be- fore he spoke. and lt was heard before hostile tribunal The treatment he received from the committee wns that of men who were angry. and alarmed at the prospect of injury to the Repub- llcan campaign Mir. Lllley's case was certainly prepared with insuflici- ent judgment before he spoke. but where is the evidence that he spoke be- fore a hostile tribunal? IL Is true that Mir. Brown of Norwich and Mir Judson Of Stratford have told us that this was the case, but they are prejudiced wit nesses in that they were the retained counsel of Mir. Lilley. As against their assurance that the tribunal was pre- judiced we have the stenographic re- port of the investigation itself which shows conclusively that Mir. Lilley was given every chance in the world to prove his charges with but one excep- ton and that was the privilege asked for to open the ,books of the offendine company that wrong might be hshec for Even that right could not have been withheld from him had he ad' yanced the necessary evidence to jus tify the belief that the books held hid den and corrupt secrets Even thu people in whom he was most Interested the rival boat company, tcstinet through It's officers and counsel that | had no reason to believe that the of fending company had ever spent dol lar 10 influence legislation or contro politIcs in congressional districts.
 The Times says that the committee was composed of men who were an gry. Likely enough, Possibly MT Brown and MT. Judson were angry ant are still angry because they could no persuade the committee to let thei client act in the capacity of judge, jur. and prosecuting officer. If there ever justification for anger the mem bers of congress had it in the deliber ate charges made by MT, Lilley Il coarse and beefy language. But wheth CT they were angry men or not IS 0 no consequence, unless 1t can be show and definitely shown that they permit ted their anger to control and gov ern their conduct. They were justifie in being angry if loss of temper 1 ever justified but they were not justi fled in letting their anger dictate thei conduct. Did they do that? If SC how?
 It is inconcevable from our modes point of view that MT. Liley's sub marine voyage should be ignored In es tmating his possible fitness for th governorship of Connecticut. An in ] SuTIlClSHL pIcpdl dllDil VI HE NnsC W a a serious error of judgment and it finds it's parallels In innumerable act after the investigation had been begul and until the present hour, That is
 statement of fact, susceptible of proof not ''personal abuse or magnifying CT TOTS of judgment Into crimes" We can not help but believe that our distin guished Hartford contemporary woul be amazingly benefited if 1t shoul carefully read the testimony, beginnin with MT, Lilley's defamation of per sonal friends and ending with the re tention in his service of the man whor he swore forged his name to defama tory letters