New-York tribune., 1922-10-20

him language which hurt his feelings ?
No. That he said he would have a Eli
increasing the Surrogates' salary
passed? No. Or that he had ATTEMPT
ed to control my acts as an Assembly
man and Senator? No.
Denial To BE Expected
"All that Murphy denies is that he
spoke to me about the Pulitzer matter.
what else could Murphy say? Would
ne under any circumstances have ad.
mleted that he spoke to me about such
e. question? leave that to the sound
common sense of the community,
Murphy's denial of the one inciden.
that exposed his motives for revenge
upon me was to be expected Does he
not place too great a tax upon the
ereouilty OF the public when he as
surnes that they will accept this state
ment, that the last interview between
US referred only to bill in which he
was so casually interested that he was
willing to leave i. to the decision of
the Legislature?
why did Murphy, whose control of
the Legislature was supreme and who
had permitted the bill to be passed by
another Democratic Legislature in 1911
and by Democratic Senate in 1912.
suddenly decide, as he says, that this
was a question for the Legislature and
not for him and his advisers? is not
that just the stock phrase used by the
boss when he doesn't do something in
the public interest? Has 1t any more
meaning than his worn-out statemen.
that the convention will decide,-a
phrase used by him SO often when he
has had the delegates in the palm Of
his hand that it has become a Joke
with the public?
Murphy was not against this bill in
1911 or, 1912. Why this sudden change
In 1913? Why was a power which he
was willing to have transferred to the
Surrogates' Court in 1911 and 1912 to
be denied in 1918? Can it reasonably
be anything except that he had sud
denly made up his mind that the Sur
rogate should not receive any further
power
What Motive Had He?
What would move him to that con-
cciusion--his explanation of our meet
ing or mine?
"Why was Murphy SO quick to recall
our interview? Is it that his recollec-
tion of it was only that of man who
had left to the Legislature the decision
of bill of slight interest to him? Or
is it more reasonable to conclude that
the last interview between us was inn
pressed deeply upon his memory by
thes nature Of the only fact which it is
in his interest to deny? Murphy was
provoked into departure from his
habitual silence. Why? Because Of
what Murphy asked me to do. Because
of my refusal to meet his demand. Be
cause he then realized once for all that
ha Il ~ 49, ( IN y u
recall the incident because Of his fail
ure to influence the decision of Judge
and because of the conclusion he then
formed that the judge he could neither
influence nor. control must be driven
from the bench? He tried to drive
men from the bench in the CAGES of SUI
preme Court Justice Newburger and
others and failed. And he'll fail now.
Takes Up Pulitzer
"Let US take up the statement of
Mr.. Pulitzer. One may make allowance
for the clumsy performance of the
Tammany boss. His. handicaps and
limitations are we'll known. Mr.. Pulit-
zer says: If Mr.. Conalan meant to
imply that Charles F.. Murphy inter
estate at the request of the Pulitzer
heirs of "The World" or Of any agent,
his assertion is destitute of any sem
blance of truth. No such request was
ever made to Mr.. Murphy, nor is it
conceivable in view Of "The Worlds"
record Of opposition to him that Mr..
Murphy would have voluntarily under
taken to influence thae Surrogate in
the appraisal Of the Pulitzer estate. :
~ implied nothing. | stated at the
Town Hall meeting and now repeat
that Murphy asked me to help to- get
The World off his neck. did not say
and do not say that he was asked by
the man who was on his neck to ask
me to take him off.
point out the clear agreement be-
tween the statements Of MIR. Murphy
and Mr.. Pulitzer. When Mr.. Murphy
says The World was on his neck, and
MIR. Pulitzer speaks of The Worlds
record of consistant opposition to Muir