The morning journal-courier., 1908-07-24
THE CASE OF LILLEY.

The Journal-Courier Is very glad to welcome the newspapers of the state into the popular conference, which has for It's purpose the consideration of the eligibility of Congressman Lil- ley to be governor of the state of Con nectlcut. The fact that he seeks the qualification of his ambition through the republican nomination Is an incl dent of the controversy, He wants to be the governor, and 1t is the right of every citizen to study him from that point of view.
 The opposition which has displayed Itself to the nomination of Mr. Lilley Is distinctly of popular origin. It has not been engineered by the friends of Governor Woodruff nor the friends of Lleutenant-G Governor Lake, though doubtless they would all gladly take advantage of the situation to land their especial favorlte in preference. It has sprung entirely from Mir Lilley's revelation of his own immature politi- cal understanding and his indifference to the reputation of equally deserving men, so long as he may profit by the outcome. If any of the supporters of MT Lllley, aside from those who re- main true to him because of early pledges from which they have not been released want the impressive reasons why he should not be nominated for governor by any party, they have but to go to the stenographic report of the founded charges against fellow mem bers of congress. They can attribute any motive they please to the course of The Journal-Courier in voicing what 1t knows definitely to be the opinion of hundreds of republicans. They cannot uiiNllc tlic ltdilul llluiStlheiit VI hi'h by his associates In congress, one Of whom is the republican candidate for vice-p president. It is James Schoolcraft Sherman of New York who charges that Mir Lilley offered to withdraw the resolution. which had for It's presum able purpose the cleaning of the halls of congress, if that gentleman would see to 1t that submarine bids were thrown open to competition. We ven ture the opinion that Mir sherman has not changed his interpretation of that offer
 , We admit that we were surprised to be called unfair" by the Waterbury American. We are equally surprised to be told by the Bridgeport Standard that we are bitter and severe" in our "denunciation" of Mir. Lilley. We are amused that the Litchfeld Enquirer should see In our opposition to Mir. Lllley his lack of interest in constitu> tional reform. We can account for the critical attitude of the Waterbury Re publican towards the editor of this newspaper. We can believe. for the Bridgeport Post says so, that Mir. Lil- ley says these "attacks' are very amusing. but we do not believe that he can be amused for a moment by the comments of those who have been as. sociated with him and who are alone furnishing the arguments which ought to prove his political undoing, All of this comment belongs in the same cate gory with the suggestion offensively made that the interviews and letters which have appeared in these columns are of the canned variety,
 We again assert that no one but Mir
 Lilley is to blame for the position in which he finds himself, and in which 
 he Is found by men who hold in high esteem the good name of Connecticut. In charging members of congress with
 graft, in failing to prove a single charge In the smallest instance, in withholding today the proof which he told the editor of this newspaper he had and would produce on the floor of the house, and in otherwise demanding
 the cashing in of pledges made unde, entirely different circumstances months
 ago, Mir. Lilley proves concluslvely his
 distinct unfitness for the office of gov
 ernor. That Is the point at issue.