Show I 1 NA V A I 1 S at I 1 it I 1 I 1 k 11 1 J I 1 4 MEMBERS OF congressional I 1 r COMMITTE E arp arg ASSAILED I 1 Y el COngress congressman ina n 1 lalley js Is asked aked to explain pla in certain letters casting severe evere reflections I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 washington I 1 aprile 24 interesting develop developments ments followed j I 1 each other in close s succession uc cession yesterday in the I 1 hearing being conducted ity dy tho special committee of tho the house of tho the charges p referred refer rd by representative geo L jalley of connecticut against athe the electric boat com company representative senta tive killcy was Vere rely taken to task by members of th tho 0 committee for allowing published criticisms of its actions over his signature to stand ifor for a month without bein contradicted 7 it it was wag 1 1 at the thel afternoon session that the pem personal nal n matters came to the surface surn ourn 1 iby r olmstead read a clipp clipping i ng front from the hartford charant of march 30 containing a letter signed b by mr lilley and dressea addressed ad to george W goff of past conn this letter which i N as in reply to one received wy by mr filloy from nir mr goft goff contained the following the select committee to incesti ga gate t e have already demonisT demonstrated rated their intention to apply the ahe whitewash brush brueh wherever where for they can therefore it is safo to assume assini that thai verb vcr little will ie he brought out they ther refused me the privilege of counsel tol cross ex X arnine amine and do not allow me ito to put questions except by submit ting them thein in writing and even then they may throw out those which they aleein improper which means throwing out all important questions I 1 believe however ho vever that the press of the country js Is almeady fully convinced mr liley stated that that letter was waa written by his secretary mr webster and that hip had not seen I 1 it t until it appeared in print mr web i ster he said had authority to sign his eatn name e to lett letters rs at i this thas point mr webster was called to the stand and that ho he wrote tha letter ile he said eald that he had gathered gather etl his inference about the committee from newspaper clippings abid and from conversations he had had with a man who had attendee some of the hearings the letter lotief was as not suggested by mr ulley ne e S said aid I 1 mr cheh 4 the stand and was asked jit it he hadi had repudiated the letter he replied that teat he had haa not do you vou repudiate it now naw asked mr olmsted Ol rosted I 1 11 1 I do alot personally desire to mae ma e that ahm charge ge 11 answered ir ulley fand and I 1 1 I tp sap a perfectly erell willing to with draw I 1 it 1 it is not a question n of 0 withdrawing taj ahe charge said mr hewak howard I 1 we liia ant to 10 locate the responsibility ity for the suggestions in n that letter I 1 te r 11 0 o this letter catts caste I 1 a reflection upon the character of the hoie of representatives senta tives and the officers of it cannot go unnoticed interposed chairman boutell A month has elapsed since you had knowledge ot I 1 aig exi during that time it I 1 WO would un ld certainly ly haw have baioa possible DOS SIble I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 vo 1 for you to explain it on the floor ot of the house or to this committee but i no DO explanation was wad forthcoming 1 I the charge said mr lilley mr air Drou broussard nard asked mr lilley if he had reprimanded bis secretary tor for writing such a letter 1 I think I 1 reprimanded my secretary replied mr liney lilley 1 I am very sure I 1 did why have you not dischar discharged aged a man who would abuse your confidence in such a manner asked mr Drous broussard sard well I 1 have not discussed hirn him re responded mr lilley mr ulley lilley said he did not know mr goft goff and when asked if other letters e rs of a similar character had teen been written and eluned with his name re plied that there might be others but lie he lid did not know how many will you let us have these letters asked mr olmstead this request brought forth the conflict between mr lilley and the committee 1 I dont think it is within the scope of this committee to examine my private correspondence this committee does not need a resolution to protect its honor 11 remarked chairman boutell bautell Bp we would like to see your letter leafer press book Q containing a copy of this le ater r ud and similar letters referring to this investigation mr lilley persisted that he object 0 jl L t rt A v hi hia FL tir pr pre e spon dence his position was wag fully stated by his counsel judson drown brown who said that mr lilley felt that it would be an injustice to him to be compelled to produce letters he had bad written to friends containing expressions of pinion opinion of the committee or any member of it t he objected to producing any letters that are confidential between himself and friends mr lilley promised to produce the letter from mr goft goff and a epry copy ot of the reply and the tha question as to whether the production of the other let letters will be required will be passed oddy oaf by tle committee later ater this incident being closed temporarily at least chairman boutell introduced R trod another matter t of per soA al nature the committee had in its I 1 possession a clipping from the bridge port conn standard of march 25 saying that it wag waff rep reported around aroun d the corridors of the capitol that th at Do boutell Rbt hormel olmstead and rodenburg had left washington the day before for new london mr lilley being there at the time for the purpose of bringing political influence to bear on mr lilley to io stop the submarine investigation of the tour per iiona mentioned mr bouten boutell ano and mr olmstead are members of tha committee and rothermel Rol hermel and aon so A telegram ads was also in th posses possel slon sion of the committee dated march 24 sent to mr lilley on the troll returning from froin connecticut by his hio private secretary stating that thesa tour four committeemen had bought apts for new london on the 4 acl licit oc train aral mr boutell said lie he would like amow now the authority of mr air webster fo for this telegram 1 mr air olmstead Olm eld had left on that day for harrisburg Harris bu and he had gone tp to springfield HIE to attend the state convention mr fr webster his 1118 information had been him by two correspondents I 1 of connecticut I 1 papers during the day a letter from mr lilley to secretary metcalf inthe interest of the lake company was wag read in this communication mr lilley referred to congressman rob erts of massachusetts saying e among the well meaning members of congress the lake people have more f friends afen d r because they never employed the methods of the holland type people it Is fr well known that the company mr roberts appears to represent Is do doing ingmore more today in the employment of questionable methods to intimidate members of congress arld and the haval committee than all other dorp corporations orations in the united states |