The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-04-30

writers is ,. FitzFatrick something more than a theory so far as this newspaper is con- cerned. So, in keeping with the principle of freedom of the press which is adhered to by THE DEMOCRAT, I am expressing my disagreement this afternoon with the position which the editors of the paper have taken on the ap- pearance of State Chairman J. Francis Smith before the Judi ciary Committee of the United States Senate in opposition to President Roosevelt's proposal to rejuvenate the Supreme Court.
 I Don't
 The editors of THE DEMO- GRAF approve of MT. Smiths action for reasons which they have made clear. I think it was the height of impertinent ef- frontery for reasons which I shall try to make plain. And in this connection I would suggest that the reader take another look at the first sentence in the parenthe- sis heading this contribution. The comments, opinions, and con- clusions hereinafter made, ex- pressed, and drawn are mine and mine alone. State Chairman Smith answered a question from one of the judiciary committee members whether the speech he delivered had been written by himself by saying that he had written it himself. What goes for MT. Smith goes for yours truly.
 Killed With Talk
 have read with no little strain on my eyes the press release copy of MT. Smiths speech. It runs for eight and a third pages of very long foolscap paper and it is single spaced. If State Chairman Smiths intention was to talk the Pres ident's proposal to death he car- ried it out to the hilt. If I were a literary critic I would be obliged to say that the stylic composition and the expression of MT. Smiths ideas which the press release ex- hibits are not up to MT. Smiths recognized excellence. No doubt that is the reason the rosey judi ciary committeeman wanted to know if MT. Smith had written the speech himself. However, like other inspired orators and pro- found thinkers, MT. Smith is en- titled to his day of. None of us, even chairman of the Connecti- cut Democratic State Central Committee can be expected to be plu-perfect all the time.
 Tough Job
 Tough as the job was I did read MT. Smiths speech through to the bitter end and at long last, Every long last) I could discover nothing new in it. Which only deepens the mystery why it was delivered at all. If the State Chairman had anything in the way of an original thought to add to the controversy there might be some excuse for his assumption of the role of Jack the Giant Killer. So far as I am able to see what he said was nothing more than 8 very bad rehash of everything everyone opposed to the Presidents proposal has re- peated ad nauseam. Including the stock tripe that acceptance of MT. Ro0sevelt's plan means the finish of liberal government m this country.
 Pure Coincidence
 It is not surprising in view or that fact that MT. Smith made haste to wash his hands of any connection with the American Liberty League. What is surpris- ing is that the Democratic State Chairman neglected to explain the peculiar coincidence that while he has scant respect for the League his position is identical with that taken by members of the organization on the Supreme Court issue. Two explanations were so obvious that wonder they did not instantly strike MT. Smith. One is that big business minds run in the same channel. The other that in the hour of the na- tion's peril all patriots think alike. What Was He Doing?
 But what impressed me above