The Waterbury Democrat., 1934-01-25
Congressman Goss
 WiU Be Ex0nerated
(Continued from Page 1)

terday's session in the caucus room of the house office building Yesterday Mornings Session Most of the morning was con- sumed by Attorney w. J. Larkin, counsel for Goss, who asked the committee to dismiss the long list of charges, including repeater votes, dead men voters and bribery, on grounds of "vague and uncer- tain evidence" Larkin soon brought up the name of w. J. Pape, who charged in deposition to Larkin that the voting lists in Waterbury were in poor condition and it was easy to use repeater voters". The attorney stated that Pape hired an investigator who was said to have learned that 129 names were wrong on the voting lists. But the publisher refused to reveal the prober's name be- cause he was afraid he would be persecuted, Larkin said.
 This showed general vagueness of evidence supporting Gormley's charges, Larkin asserted. Jump- ing to his feet in answer to Lar kin's motion for dismissal, Attor- ney John F. McDonough of Nau- gatuck, attorney for the contest ant, stated that Pape had asserted that there were 5000 possible re- peaters in Waterbury.
 He then launched into a lengthy condemnation of Goss and stated he was prepared to show that Goss had given a check to a negro of a nearby town to buy up votes of the Ansonia, Conn, colored colony. McDonough told the com mittee heatedly that the key tc his case would lie in the alleged fact that a Goss election worker | in the third Waterbury district had | repeatedly entered polling booths and attempted to influence voters
 The heavy-set, red-faced lawyer arraigned Goss with the Wnois series of frauds and corruption charged in his brief and said Il was foolish to think that they could be vague or uncertain. H' repeatedly flattered committee members by referring to them al your honor".
 Attorney Gormley Present
 | Goss did not attend the hear ing. But Gormley was conspicu ous in the front row of spectators Immediately preceding the lunch con recess, the committee hear' associate counsel for Gormley Judge Timothy Ansbury, of tn National Capital, enter a stron argument against Goss. Juds Ansbury, during his argument, en gagged in repeated controversle with committee member, Charle D. Willard, republican, New YorR a newcomer to congress. So heate did these discussions become tha Chairman Gavagan was forced t demand both men to hold thei tempers. "The only man who ha any money to buy votes", Ansbur charged, pounding the table, wa MT Goss. His check for $50 wa given to that negro club. He wa buying votes"
 The hearings resumed at p. III and both attorneys presented thel rebuttals. Larkin entered a Ter vent appeal with the committee U "consider MT Goss's kiddies." "Th, kiddies will be going to school, Larkin cried, and if you lint against MT Goss, he will D' branded a criminal, and they VII be shamed before their fellow students" He then went througf the list of charges against Cos and asserted that in all but ont case they were meaningless ane lacked the shadow of proof.
 The one point on which he yield ed was the case of one voter whe became confused, Larkin said, 1T the voting booths and blunderet Into a second booth and voted twice because "he thought he wal required to- =.
 Larkin off cred to concede Gormley this vote and said that hii client would still bo far ahead Goss's plurality in the election wal 78 votes. In reply MeDonougf also went down the list of chnrgei and accused Goss of every mag innble kind of election trick from dead mems to criminals and in' sane persona names on the bal lots. "Mr Gormloy also has Bom' klddies," tho attorney offered, "if fact. he has four little ones and | wlfo, and they are just as import ant as Mr doas's children. An content Co lot the committee view tho block and lot tho chips fnl wh(rs they may" oormiey's eoun'
 0ormley's Early History
 ifo reviewed tho history q dofmley from hls days ns a youti