The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1886-08-12
What It Means.


sonally, we have the highest respect. but
no man should ever be allowed to repre-
sent the 10th District of Virginia, who
would be willing to stand upon such plat
form as that laid down for him. Despite
the eloquent tributes paid to Mr.. Tucker
by the members of the late convention, it
was perfectly evident, that, with the ex-
ception OF one OF two counties, Mr..
| Tucker could have commanded little sup
port, had he again been an aspirant for the
nomination-proVided always, the dele
gates had represented their own senti-
mentS, and the sentiments Of those who
| sent them to the convention. And yet
the nominee Of 1886 goes forth to the peo-
pie upon the platform of 1SS4-a platform
which the majority of the Democrats
themselves utterly condemn and despise.
| 1t is the platform upon which Mr.. Tucker
ran and was elected, and it is the platform
which he has consistently and persistently
supported on the hastings and in the halls
of Congress. If such a declaration of
principles, or rather want of principle,
really voices the views of the Democrats
Of the District, then they could have found
no ADLER representative than the present
member. Whenever and wherever Oppor-
tunity was offered he has denounced pro-
tective tariff, as the platform demands.
With like uniformity he has opposed the
Blair Educational Bill, in accordance with
the express declaration of this same plat
form. And so we might run through the
whole list, were it not familiar reading to
the intelligent public. If Capt. Bum
gardner proposes to follow in the footsteps
of Mr.. Tucker, then there is little to be
gained by the exchange. If he intends, if
elected, to represent the true interests of
the District, the ticket he has secured
carries him in an opposite direction.
But let US see the program laid down for
our distinguished townsman.
| This was the sole resolution adopted by
the convention
| heS0lUed, That this Convention reaffirms it's
1 allegiance to the principles of the Democratic
party as enunciated in the platforms of the last
State and National Conventions of said party.
Mr.. Poore, a delegate from Appomattox,
in speech of fervor and force, declared
that the people of his section wanted no
such lodging of vital issues no such
equivocation. They demanded to know
whether the candidate for whom they were
to vote was in heart sympathy with the
Blair bill, and he offered this substitute
RESOLVED, That each candidate whose name
| may be brought before the convention be al
| views upon the important questions at issue, to
| wit, the Blair bill, the inUernal revenue sys-
| tenn, &c.
His colleagues, however, had no idea Of
thus committing themselves against the
original resolution, and thereby stultifying
their action of two years before. So they
voted down the substitute by majority of
over two to one.
Upon the principal question, named by
| Mr.. Poore, what is the declaration of the
District platform ?
1t is well known that the Blair Bill pro-
yides for the distribution of $77 ,000, 900 by
the general government for free school
purposes, the amount to be apportioned to
the several states ID proportion to the
illiteracy prevailing therein. Under that
| apportionment $56, 000.000 would have
| come to the south, Virginia's share being
$5,310,0OO The platform adopted at Lex
ington reaffirms the Democratic National
and State platforms upon this measure.
What then do the National and State
| platforms declare?
| The National platform, adopted at Chi
cago in 1884, referring to this very bill,
for there was no other of like kind thought
| of. says:
we are opposed to all propositions
aciesch upon dlay oretects, aUoatld concert the
general government INTO machine for COL
Letting tares to be distributed among the
states or the citizens thereof"
Could language be more explicit Could
| a commitment against the Blair bill be
more pronounced ? But that there may
be no chance for any one to be deceived as
to the real meaning of that plank of the
Democratic platform, lei US call as a wit
ness the man who wrote it.
In the debate in the House on the 18th
of May last, upon the motion to set day
for the consideration of the business to be
reported by the Labor Committee, (among
which was the Blair billy Mr.. Cowles,
Dem of N. c., expressed his sorrow that
Notwithstanding the declarations of the
State and National Democratic Conyen-
tions, he should find himself among so few
who were willing to champion the cause
Of public education.
Mr.. Morrison, the author of the Demo.
cratic National platform, suggested that
the gentleman forgot what party he was
in. The Blair Educational Bill, said Mr..
Morrison, was favored by the Republican
party and endorsed in it's platform, but
not by the Democratic party.
The gentleman unanimously chosen by
the Democratic majority as it's candidate
for speaker of the House, was known to be
an open ana avowed enemy of the bill. |
When elected to the Speakership he so
constituted the Committee on Education
that majority were hostile to the meas
ure. Anticipating that Republican Sen
ate would again send the Blair bill to the |
House, and again demand that the people |
of the South should be aided in educating
their children, Mr.. Carlisle prepared for |
its second burial. He was not disappoint- |
ed. The bill passed the Senate for the |
second time on the 9TH of March last. The |
vote recorded was IS for and ~ against. |
Of the IS, 10 were Republicans and l6 |
Democrats. with 6 Republicans and 6 |
Democrats voting nay. A number of pairs
were announced. Had the Senators
paired been present, the vote would haye
stood As ayes and % nays; of those voting
in the affirmative 26 were Republicans and
10 Democrats. Of the IS voting against
the bill, IL were Republicans and 10 DEM
ocrats. So that majority of those who
favored the bill in the Senate were Repub-
lcans and a majority of those who opposed
it were Democrats.
The bill went down to the House-a
House having Democratic majority of SO
and was referred to the Educational
Committee. 1t slumbered there, the
Committee refusing to report it. On the
goth of March, Mr.. Willis, a friend of the
re-introduced the bill, as House
bill, and moved that it be referred to the
Committee on Labor, with view to secur-