The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-08-12
Pubic Opinion,

fOp 40 OPihiShs
No ubnt or 20 whom shall we liken The
,onrnals al Kew York, daily, semi-weckly,
srtweckts and weekly, which are con-
sfnually threatening the members OF Con-
xress wsth the dire vengeance OF their con
x,itussts for having passed the river aho
barbor bill over the veto OF the Prcssden'
ofSbe United Statess
congressman are, too many on hem,
demagogues. II is not necessary for any
body to remind them that, In ordcr 70 IN
sure their reelection TO Congress, they must
not run counter to the wishes OF their con-
st;tuents. A congressman who should vote
for n measure to Which he knew his con-
s,ituents were opposed ough, as rule to
be Landed for his independence OF charac'
fer. There are, alas, so few of that class
that the papers OF the country are seldom
called upon to sound their praises in the
public ear.
II must be supremely ludicreus to con-
gresham who voted TO override the river
and horbor veto to read In the New YORK
daily. which he takes in order to get It's
news articles, long and stupid editorial
telling HIM that he has offended his con-
misunderstanding him so, who perhaps has
never bad an opinion Of his own, and never
cast n vote in Congress without first deter
mining IN his own mind whether or not IL
would please the populacc of lis district OF
Statct or do such articles cause the afore-
said congressman. TO pose as pearless, I'M
partial, and independent law-makery Fer
baps, though perfectly confident that he has
carried out the wishes OF his constituents, 1t
makes him "feel good" TO find that some
body credits him with having cast an inde-
pendent vote. Perhaps he himself half be-
lieyes that he is q ''iearAess tribune OF the
people" Perhaps he lets his wife and chill
dren lead the denunciations OF the metro
politan Journals in order to impress them
with due sense OF the greatness and eX-
ceeding popularity of the man who can
thus defy the popular will and still retain
his seat in Congress.
To what, then, we repeat the question,
shall we liken the Journals OF New York,
which talk so glibly about what "thc peo-
pie" demand OF their representatives in
Congress? Shall we recall the three tailors
of Tooley street? Or the African chieftain
who, after eating his dinner, caused pro-
clamation to he made that everybody
else might eat? Even The Nation has
Joined in the foolish cry, seeming
really to suppose that "the people" are
in a bad h,mor with their congressman be-
cause OF their action in passing the river
and harbor bill over the Presidents veto.
All those Journals will doubtless open their
eyes with establishment when they learn
next fail that not one single representative
in all the broad limits Of this land Of more
than fifty millions OF people has been left at
home because he did not agree with the
would-be leaders OF public opinion who
control the press of the city of New York.
The river and barbOr bill ought to have
been passed over the veto. Its defeat
would have been shame. Therefore we
do not wish to be understood as rejecting
upon any congressman who voted for it
upon its final passage, though some Of them,
no doubt, did 50 only for the reason that
their constituents were in favor Of if. We
only wished to cali attention to the folly of
the New York papers.