The Waterbury Democrat., 1940-01-16
Iet's Look at the Record


 referendums vet vivid actuality in the minds of thousands of the electorate, rlInnbles and rumors of the coming state and national elections this fall are already beginning to take on potential propor- tions. Tn that respect we are already hearing as far as the Democratic outlook is concerned revival of that old Banquo's ghost of Democratic state politics, the Thew" and the "old guard". Considering the source of the resurrection of that much rattled skeleton of yore, the req son for it's injection into Democratic state politics is hardly worth considering. But now that the subject has been introduced, as Al" Smith used to say, Lets look at the record.
 State Democrats would-be friends and advisers, among whom no later than yes terday was the good old Solicitous Water bury Republican of the LeavenWorth Street Republican and American "combi- nation" newspapers, are already predicting dire and dreadful possibilities should that old triumvirate of Messrs. Cummings, Fitzgerald, and Spellacy, once more solidify their efforts towards directing the future destinies of Democratic state poll- tics They even go so far as to say such a catastrophe would be usurping James A. Farley's personal prerogative. Heaven forbid! What would Connecticut first, second, third, and fourth class post masters do without James Aloysius to guide them?
 On the other hand these advisers point with pride and look with acclaim to the wonderful achievement of the Smith Maloney- Cross little triumvirate of more recent years. Once more "let us look at the record" If we recall alright in the first two elections, Governor Wilbur L.. Cross just nosed in lone winner (thanks to his own personal popularity and lnde- pendent vote-getting ability). The rest of the ticket was left at the post. On his third and fourth endeavors (thanks again to his personal magnetism) Governor Cross won out and the rest of the ticket likewise (thanks to President Roosevelt's nationwide popularity. So where does that bring us? Right down to the last and disastrous record of 1888. LET'S LOOK AT THAT RECORD!
 There were no Cummings, Fitzgeralds or Spellacys at the helm during that manhandled and mismanaged campaign. True, they offered their services to the party, but by no means were they the di- recting geniuses of most ingenius canl- paign. The Smith-M -Maloney- little triumvirate was in the saddle that year; Governor Cross, perhaps to whom least of the blame can be laid, merely by virtue of his candidacy for the governorship. However, he lent his office to the fiasco as much as those that decreed 1t, when he allowed himself to be partner to the shelving of Labor Commissioner Joseph M. Tone for the office of Lieutenant Governor That was Connecticut Demo- crats' prize boner of all times. The leaders that pulled 1t will alibi it by say ing 1t was the unprecedented McLevy Socialist vote, but it would have been greatly lessened had Joe Tone, just as good friend to Labor as Jasper McLevy, been on the ticket. The sad thing of that boner wasn't that the smart leaders guessed wrong and lost, but that the state lost one of it's finest political statesmen, Senator Augustine Lonergan, and even Governor Cross himself in the deal.
 That's the record of the so-called thew guard, younger generation as 1t were, in Democratic state politics. It measures up no better and perhaps just as bad as the party's friends and advisers are telling us were things in the days of the "old guard" They just didn't get to first base and won't again unless they look to the personalities and magnetism of their candidates rather than the inner workings of their machine. A truly mag netic candidate of the type of a Cross, Tone, or even crossing the party line to the Republican side of the fence, Dan aler, or Talbot, can be elected, but not boss-ridden, machine-co -coddled candidate of either the "new" or "old guard".