Norwich bulletin., 1922-11-06
CHALLENGES sPELLACY TO
 ANSWER SEVENTEEN oUEsTIC


 CHALLENGES sPELLACY TO
 ANSWER SEVENTEEN QUESTIONS
 1nasmuch as the nest salient points of the Spellacy memoranda, written while the present democratic candidate for United States senator was travelling through New England soliciting votes for A. Mitchell Palmer for president have been repeatedly ignored and still remain unanswered by MT. Spellacy, the repub- ican state central committee issued statement Sunday covering the main points Of the Bielaski-Spellacy matter to date. A series of questions are asked of MT. Spellacy, which the republican com- mittee ayers he has not and cannot an- swer. The statement follows: l. Since the campaign opened Mr. Spelacy has repeatedly stated that he would welcome debate on the public platform. Early in the campaign, he said, T think that the people of Con l necticut are entitled to hear matters de- bated so that they can make a selection | when they cast their votes on election day"
 MT. Bielaski and Miss Stevens have not | only offered him an opportunity but have l dared him to face them and denY his | questionable actions while assistant at- | torney-general under E. Mitchell Palmer. | Why do you decline to accept the chal- lenge Mfr. Spenacy?
 2. Since the publication of Mfr Spell l lacy's memoranda by the republican stat 2 | central committee, the democratic candi- date for United States senator has spent
 his time telling the people that the cor.
 respendence was of a private nature and
 should not have been made public. lie
 has not denied the authenticity of tho
 memoranda. He wrote it; can he deny this?
 | 3. Will MT. spellacy deny that he i travelled through New England while ag-
 astant attorney general and recommend. ed trading federal offices paying 3leel per month, for votes for A. Mitchell Pal. mer in the democratic national conyen. ton of 1920?
 4. Will he deny that votes for Palmer
 in the convention and appofntments o
 men to federal offces in New Englan,
 back up and substantiate statements is
 sued by the republican state central com mittee?
 i 5. In his speech at Waterbury, Mid
 dletovn and elsewhere, MT. Spellacy hal
 quoted excerpts from letters written b,
 his former secretary, Miss Stevens to MT Bielaski. The balance of the correspond
 ence was not referred to, because otlie
 parts Of the letters not quoted by Mi
 Spellacy substantiate the charges mad
 against him. Isn't this true, MT. Spei
 lacy?
 6. Why doesn't Mr. Spellacy Hak
 public the contents Of all the letters? H is afraid to, just as he is afraid to naee Mir. Bielaski or Miss Stevens in public Isn't this true?
 I. MT. Spellacy deliberately tWiste
 and falsified duties of letterSiA aa eHoi . to make a satisfactory answer to tn charges made against him. Both he an , the Hartford Times have attempted {
 make it appear that MT. Bielsski ceeree
 Miss Stevens by referring to a letter sen
 by Miss Stevens to MT. Bielasd and b referring to what they aver was his ar : swer when his letter was written Ay months previous. Isn't this true, A tSpellacy? =. 8. Mir. Bielaski says 'fAe pity ef |. is that it involves the character Of 2 1 decent woman" The charge is that N ,, spellacy has misquoted her letters. An no man with sense of honor wou $ attack a woman without giving her s opportunity to defend herself. Isn't th
 txuei Il g. Mf. Spefiacy slated in his speech, l. that Miss Stevens begged him to RIlo e her to stay in the department of iusti l. as his secretary. About a week after e says this incident occurred. he Ereta s MT. Bielaski Qetter of November 2sti n stating that he was fortunate in havil It her conscientious services. Why do ?. he publicly accuse q woman in spite d such facts. when he refuses her CT ek y CTS who know the facts, an, oppoFtuni is to prove them 1sefere him in public? n 10. Miss Stevens on account of h
 length of service in. the department 4 justice, knew that Nr. SpellAey va ,r violating his public ofiee. She also VI ,5 aware that a federal law required | n to report such violations aaG reahxiI IF that she would involve herself if she ( If not take action, she reported Mfr. SD, d lacy through Mr. Bielaski. Does N ,e Speliaey deny such a law, and does 'e tdeny that such procedure was right, q ,e cordine tei the law:
 Fei II. Was not Mfr. BielaGki a form sr chief of the bureau of investigation al e. a former high federal offieer bound 1t take action on Miss Stevens repol le Was it not his solemn duty to rept
 Mir. Speliacy's action to the geveI
 iment? Did he not place the infernI
 ton which he had in the hands of a fe
 eral judge and was it not sent to ! F Tunulty; secretary to the president .u the United States, where as Mr. Bielai DO says, it rested?" Will Mr. 6pslla re not agree that this was the pgocedr u- required by laWf
 h. 12.. In his memoranda covering op work in Massachusetts, Mir. SpeIts ad said, "Mr. oLeary (state chairma st has agreed to go around. the state Y
 iting the various congressional distr;t of told him I would keep him fully ! u- yised of such deyelopments, in Mas se chusetts as came to my attention, "a
 also told him that his expenses Wol ,a be taken care of. ... I feel that if ra expenses were paid, he would proha : devote considerably more time to t ..' job than otherwise. I feel 1t very d portaAt that he should de 90. Mas
 chusetts is a large state--it has thir
 six votes-and believe that Mr.
 LeaFy is an ideal man, coupled V he lsuch other people as are now work he there" Subsequent investigation shc to that o,Leary did weFk and H his ch penses were paid. a$ Mir. spellaey s ,n they would be, whe paid them. A IS. While on his delegate tries,