The Waterbury Democrat., 1942-07-28

with the opinion of commission CT in a given situation. Until a court passes on the merits of question, the Attorney General should be deferred to and his advice accepted.
 Supervision
 The supervision of the Connec- ticut Highway Department re- quireS constant application to duty, a full appreciation of the tremendous responsibility imposed on the commissioner, extreme care in the selection of subordinateS, a continuing familiarity with the major developments and problems within the department, and an intelligent assumption of the ad- illustrative and executive author ity reposed in the commissioner by by statute. Obviously, much de tail must be committed to division heads and subordinate employees. Nevertheless, 1t is incumbent on faithful commissioner, who is alive to his duties, to have a complete grasp of the broad outlines and as- poets of departmental problems. l expect that all these standards will be met and maintained con- stantly.
 I recognize that only the highest reasons and the surest proof can justify the destruction of the hon. or, reputation, and career of a pub- lie servant, against whom no claim or proof of dishonor has ever been made. Throughout my study of this matter, have not been un- mindful of Commissioner Cox's va ried career in the field of engin- eering. Following 8 thorough scholastic training, he engaged in the practice of his profession, and was then called to the faculty of Yale University. The acquisition Of his professional status required years of industry and study. This status is not 8 possession to be trided with except upon convincing proof of willful mis- conduct or neglect in the dis charge of his official duties. I do not find this misconduct or neglect present from 8 reading of the testimony and a thoughtful study of the finding of Referee Hinman. Therefore, the order of suspension entered by me on Feb ruary 4, 1942, Is revoked. William J. Cox is reinstated as Highway Commissioner of the State of Con- necticut.
 l feel privileged to make public acknowledgement of the impartial, industrious, and important service rendered the State of Connecticut by Referee Hinman. To him and to Chief Justice William Maltbie, who counselled with me in matters of procedure, I express a very real and sincere appreciation not only for myself but also for the citizens of Connecticut.
 Procedure
 The procedure adopted in this matter, whereby a state referee was delegated to serve as a presid- ing officer, comments itself as be- ing most salutary. Under existing law, the governor must afford an accused official 8 full hearing, must prepare a statement of facts which he finds to have been prov en, and must draw conclusions upon which he is to predicate his ultimate decision.
 When the charges were preferred against Commissioner Cox, fore. saw an extended hearing with q vast number of witnesses and a considerable number of written and printed exhibits. To preside over a hearing of such magnitude would consume weeks of executive time, which, in justice to the citizens of Connecticut, should be utilized for administrative problems incident to the conduct of the office of Governor.
 It Is my earnest hope that the full hearing of the Attorney Gen. erals allegations against Commis- sioner Cox will inspire in all de- partments of the State Govern ment 8 keener regard for and an alertness to the need for the high est standards of conduct and per formance in official life.
 Respectfully,
 ROBERT A. HURLEY (SignedJ