The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-04-28
(BY THE OUT EAsTER)

The action of J. Francis Smith of this city, chairman of the dem- ocratic state central committee,
 in appearing before the U. s. senate committee in opposition to the proposal of President Roose- velt's plan for increasing the membership of the supreme court, not only surprised many of us out here, but made us feel and reach the conclusion the young chair
 man had been poorly advised, providing he had discussed the question with anyone before he made the attack. Therefore. our position is entirely different from the editorial viewpoint of The Waterbury Democrat.
 In the first place the political game is 8 give and take propo- Sition. It always was, and always will be. Franc" Smith is most capable and charming little fel- low; we like him, as we do the entire Smith family. We were de- lighted when we heard of his election to the chairmanship; we predicted a great future for his political activities. We wanted to see him go ahead, and we still
 want to see him advance not alone in political circles, but also in the great business of which he is the guiding spirit.
 But we cannot condone his opposition to the Roosevelt plan; we cannot approve of his attack. upon the worthy chairman of the national committee, Jim Farley. To us, MT. Farley is the shining light of the demacrotic party. His remarkable success, in our estima- tion, is responsible for the unkind and unjust thinngs said about him by active republicans and the republican press. It's bad enough to have republicans charging dic- tatorship on the part of the pres- ident, but it's doubly so to find leading democrats and especially democratic chairmen finding fault with the head of the party. A chairman is differently situated than a United States senator. It's his duty to lead the party to suc- cess on election day; senators and representatives may possibly op- uose a plan on 8 territorial issue, that is they might feel it better for their own personal advance ment among their constituency than to go along with the admins tration. No chairman has the right to hold such a view, we believe.
 Now, here in Connecticut, we have a democratic state govern ment; democratic state officers, but with many of their offices still filled by republicans, hang. overs from the past administra- tions. The governor is demo- crat, but a considerate chief exc cutive; that is he gives and takes for what he believes is the better ment of the party. On that score we do not find fault. Still, name 8 republican governor who ever gave as many judgeships to the opposite party.
 But is there any question in the minds of the people that it was MT. Roosevelt who carried them into office in 1882 and again in 1936. Is there any dispute on that point? Out Easter thinks we are unanimous on that question. We believe the great Roosevelt popularity was responsible for the landslide all over the country. Out Easters voted for the presi- dent and the democrats, almost to a man. True, most of us are d democrats, anyway, but there were other, many former republicans, who cast their ballots for the same party.
 Connecticut is not a democratic state. The democrats have had little control of the state house for the past 50 years. Why, back in Che early nineties, their comp troller, Staub of New Milford, locked the doors of the capitol on the overlapping Governor Mor- gan G. Bulkeley, and he opened them with 8 crossbar. Bulkeley claimed that Luzon B Morris, had not received a majority of the votes cast, and proceeded to retain the office of governor. The then Governor David B. Hill of New York, when 8 state requisi- ton was presented by the late