The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1881-06-29

when the Rexdlusters read 10 northern
16ufSsls the many dolesut sFtsc'es when
their platform has evoked because OF y"
declaration In favor Of q" free ballot snd .
fair COUNT they must laugh at the enor.
nous capabiIIty Of being numougged 'na'
Il manifested by the northern Aaters OF tue
southern people. This declaration Is con.
strued. not to be q demand Tor toe repcn Oh
the cspitstlon.tsx Law but for impartial
Judges and perfect freedom to vote. Jnesc
Virginia enjoys In rs great Q degree az any
other state in the Union. We have no iuea
tbst there e any New Englspd state IN
which The voters are o. free from interlcr'
euce BY the employer with their VOTING
rr,v;,ece. The negro employs here votes
carly for the Republican candidate, ana
then goes and works all day for bis Demo-
cratic employer.
Massachusetts, Kansas, Connecticut
Pennsylvania. and we know not how many
other States, restrict 10 various ways the
rioh, 10 vote. Massachusetts requires as
prerequisite to voting the prepayment OF q
cap,tai,on-tax OF two dollars per annum ana
also ability to read the State Constitution.
snupose virginia were to restrict her voters
IN the same way. There might be room Tor
complajnt In that case. The impudence
and hypocrisy OF DAWES aud HoAR and
other Massachusetts, libellers and slanderers
OF Virginia are surprising; for 1t Is almost
incredible that any man should have the
face 10 arraign Virginia for making her
voters pay dollar year when his own
State makes her citizens pay two dollars q
wear and learn to read, before they are per-
mitted to vote.
However, we do not care to discuss Just
now the question whether the Msssachu'
setts law disfranchises more voters and
better class Of voters than our law disfran'
cbises. We wish merely to call the a'ten.
ton OF Mr. DAWES and Mr.. HoAR and all
the other traducers Of this old State to the
fact that the Legislature OF Virginia has the
power to reduce the capitation tax so as to
render il in effect no tax at all-say to five
cents per annum-and that the Legislature
W0tcn esecteu GeutTti MahoNb W 'pC
United States Senate did not so reduce that
tax. Why not? VIII some one explain
the necessity for submitting constitutional
amendment, to the voters when all the
change that was demanded could have been
effected practically by simply providing by
law that the capitaiion tax shall be only five
cents year? The Constitution requires
that person Offering to vote shall have
paid the capiiation tax "required by law;
and il another place 1t provides thnt this
tax shall not exceed one Collar per annum
on every male citizen twenty-one years old.
So it is clear that the Legislature has power
to do away with the tax.
II will be said that the Governor would
have vetoed bill for reducing the capita"
ton tax TO five cents IL the Legislature had
passed such a bill. The belief that the Gov
ernor would veto the RIDDLEBERGER bill did
not prevent the same Legislature from pass
ing this bill. We venture TO say that Gov
ernor HOLIDAY nlver told any member Of
the Legislature that be would veto bill to
reduce the capitation tax.
In view OF these facts, what do the north
elm libeIlers of Virginia think OF themselves?
They are pretty set OF ignoramuscs.