The morning journal-courier., 1908-12-29
Tuesday, December 2s, 1908.
NH. LlhnY, MR. FOX AND OTHERS.

MIR. LLLEY, MR. FOX AND OTHERS.
 If anything could justify us in our own eyes in pretudging tho action of the election court 1t would be the con- duct of Mr. 14iley's indlscreet and painfully inconslderate newspaper ad vocates. The Journal Courier has con- sistently refraincd from discussing the case in other than an mpersonal man ner and from in any way considering MT Lilley's relation to 1t. The attitude of his newspaper defenders makes at last further silence in part impossible. We have invited no controversy, and If one follows 1t will not he our fault We merely decline longer to permit certain of our contemporaries to deliberately misrepresent this newspaper.
 We have said in behalf of MT. Fox that he was solely responsible for the creation of the election court, and that evety instinct of fair play demanded that he should not he preiudged any more than Mir Lilley should be on ac- count of the charges made by MT Fox. In spite of this perfectly fair attitude MT. Fox Is now maliclously charged with "vindictive hostility" towards Mir. Llley and the attempt has been made to associate this newspaper with that condition of mind. We do not believe MT. Fox is any more vindictlve toward Mir. Lilley than Mir Lilley was thought to be vlriictlYe towards a certain submarine boat concern when he charged 1t with corrupt practices. The attitude of the entire state press towards Mr Lilley was one of sympa- thy until he deserted the inquiry and failed to redeem his promise to reply in full to the report of the committee. II never occurred to The Journal-C -Couri- CT that he lacked the necessary proof 
 show he did lack Under all of the cir cumstances Mir Fox ls entitled to tho same consideration, until 1t Is shown that in his case too he has proceeded in hasty and lndefcnsible manner To demand extraordinary rights for Mir. l.illey and to insist upon no rights at all for Mir, Fox may he good machine journalism but It does not square with the ethics of the trade
 The Hartford Courant to the con trary. The Journal Courier has never expressed the hope that the question of the constitutionality of tho corrupt practices law would he raised in the manner in which it has been raised. In a general discussion of the law we did say that the friends of corrupt prac- tices legislation were moro interested fin ascertalning just what power the etate of Connecticut possesses to pro tect itself against the well understood political corruption which has prevail cd for so many years in this state than the exposure of any individual, and that one result of the inquiry might be to present that information Had it been our intention to follow in the steps of too many of our contempora. ries, and freely discuss the election court and its exclusive business, we should have rislSed the opinion that the corrupt practices law is legal in ae- cordance with the provision of article four of the state constitution, which declares that "the general assembly shall by law prescribe the manner ir which all questions concerning the cleo ton of governor, or lleutenant-goy- ernor shall be determined" This Is what the general assembly did do in the case of the corrupt practices act the normal enforcement of which is now interrupted by a formal question of constitutional integrity. We should have anticipated the comment of tho Springfield Republican, which appears in it's issue of Monday, and said in be. half of Mr.. Lillcy "Concede that tho law is constitutional and let the light be turned on the records Of my cam pagning have nothing to hide"
 But far beyond the particular rights of Mr. Fox and Tho Journal-Couriei Btands in impressive significance tht oyerpowerlug rights of the republican