The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-12-11
Is II SOP

Y Is It So?
There are few men in the Legislature who
do mo. desire to see. the -pablic-debt ques-
ZION settled and taken out Of the political
arena. We are sure that the met, OF inIei-
lirencc. capability, and honor, are sick ~
heart because OF the base uses to when taeS
behold questions Of practical nature
auessions Of State finance and business
perverted to party uses. 1t Is DISCUSSING
thing indeed. The caucus held on SATURDAY
night. in the capitol. OF members VINO fea''y
desired to see this settlement was-aof
.on,a object OF a personal nature, we are
sure-split in two. One party secedea ana
,oorched OF to n secret meeting. The pa
,,ers say that reporters We're not allowed 70
enter the room where the conciaVe met
and therefore there is no report OF the say
,ncs and doings OF the conciare aforesaid
One fact is stated, however, and that
is: that the persons composing the
meeting resolved that, individually as wen
az collectively, they would do nothing con-
trary to the wishes and expressed VIII OF
the conclave. They formed sort OF COM
mittee OF safety after the manner OF that OF
the French revolution hundred years ago.
and initiated that committee, Furthermore,
in the subsection and allegiance OF the
members composing the body to its autho'
rity.
II the statement is erroneous we shall DE
glad to learn the fact. But certain it is that
the gentlemen who seeded from the large
hody OF members who were met to consult
as representatives oil, the State, and we trust
rs patriots, over the condition OF the Com
monwealth, departed under evideneexcite-
ment and retired to room with closed
doors. Therefore it certainly may be said
that these representatives Of the people
have made their consultations about
public affairs a matter OF secrecy,
hidden from the public eye, and
therefore screened from public criticism.
Does such a proceeding accord with the
ordinary view Of the representative duty :
Members of the Legislature were not sent
to the capital to legislatc in secret upon nj
fairs OF State. The business Of the State is
matter for. open deliberation. The peo-
pie should know every representative act
of their representatives. Privacy is nd
verse to public accountability-plots and
schemes adverse to public safety and to lib
erty find in secrecy the surest means OF sue
cess. The pubic is naturally opposed to
them because there is ever the apprehen--,
sion that their objects are censurable and.
not favorable to the public good, ii for no
other reason, because they are secret.
Bad enough was it for the gentlemen to go
off from their brethren and consult in the
dark; worse; far, was, it that they should
pledge themselves to obey the will OF the
caucus on subjects OF public concern, to con-
slider which they were sent by their consti-
tuents to the capital. We trust this is not
true. It would be great indiscretion, to
say the least, in any man thus to part not
only with his personal liberty, but with his
representative freedom, to perform his duty
to his constituents according to his own
Judgment and conscientious convictions.
This is direct violation Of fealty to the peo-
pie. There could be nothing more clear.
Such pledge would be treacherous to the
Legislature itself; for the essence and OBJ
jeet OF that body is to ascertain, through
deliberation and conference Of the peoples
representatives, what is best for the public
good, while such a pledge trammels the legis-
lator who takes it, and shuts his ears and his
judgment to both debates and facts that oc-
cur in the body to which he legally belongs,
and whose collective wisdom he is morally
and politically bound to respect.
It would certainly be no more than just
to the constituent body that they should
well understand the facts about the caucus
OF the biiliard-room.. ... ..n.r. .s.- !