New Britain herald., 1924-09-30

of the regrettable chapters of Con- necticut legislative history. It Is true that no law was violated In giv- ing away these rights In perpetuity It was, however, & wicked thing for the legislature to do. The water power belonged to the people of the state. The legislature had no moral right to give 1t absolutely free to private interests desiring to exploit 1t for their own profit"
 Was Railroad Lobbyist
 That MT. Roraback has been lobbyist was testified by Charles g. Mellon, former president of the New Haven railroad, who under oath de- clared he had employed Mir Rora- back for a fee to represent the rail- road at state capitol. His work did not merely consist in appearing be- fore committees at hearings, but The worked in other ways to &C., complish what he wanted done." Tt has long been well understood that no measure can be passed which Mir. Roraback opposes and that measures which he espouses are sure to go through" the expose declared.
 "Mr. Roraback's control over the legislature is.based upon the control of committees. The important com mittees are all hand-picked. Men who are known to be faithful to the leader always dominate the com mittees on interpretations, judiciary, railroads, labor, appropriations and cities and boroughs. In the old days the committees on suffrage and excise always were packed with the foes of suffrage and of prohibition. Because 1t is the unwritten law that committee reports shall be sup ported, the boss seldom has to worry about the legislature itself. All he has to do Is to see to 1t that the con- mittee report is what he wants. The rest will take care of itself. Occa- sionally there is slip in that sys- tenn. Then the hand of MT. Rora- back can be seen working through the dozen or more satellites who rush about here and there button- holing representatives andsenators, lining them up to vote the way the boss desires"
 Opposed Woman Suffrage
 When MT. Roraback came into power there were two prominent is- sues before the people of the state prohibition and woman suffrage. All that was asked in either case was a referendum by the people of the state, and MT. Roraback undertook upon himself to say that the people 1 of the state could not have a refer. endum.
 Finally, when the federal suffrag amendment was proposed, MT. Ror; back threw all his strength int preventing ratification by Connect cut. The Times continues:
 Finally, when the federal suffrae amendment was proposed, MT. Rora back threw all his strength int preventing ratification by Connect cut. When enough states had ap proved so that ratification was cer tain and 1t was only question whether Connecticut should ratify in season to give the women tn vote in 1920 or whether they should be compelled to wait four years, Nil. Roraback again threw all his weight into the scales against them. There Is no doubt but it was the insistence of the Roraback machine, and chiefly of "Mr. Roraback, which caused Governor Marcus Holcomb to take such a wholly unreasonable stand on the question of a special session to ratify the amendment. Sixty-one per cent of the members of the legislature asked for such a session and petition signed by more than 100000 women, all of voting age, was laid before him.
 But for the positive influence of J. Henry Roraback Connecticut woman might have had the ballot in state and municipal affairs nearly a decade before it was finally given to them against his will. But for his opposition Connecticut might have been numbered among the thirty six states whose ratification made the nineteenth amendment effective. Because of his opposition it wasn't. "
 The boss's attempts to prevent the state highways from being eliminat- |. ed from politics succeeded until a Democratic senate came into power in 1913. He has been a reactionary political campaign manager for years and figured. in the disgraceful con-
 A, .s 1o1o ,,-hiak rn,,,Itad ir +b q