Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-01-13
SUNDAY. ....JANUARY 13. 1895.
r,sc.,ns Un,ted States Senators.


The Norfolk Landmark has an editorial
almost a column long IN answer TO re-
cent one Of ours on the subject OF the
election OF United States senators by
the people. We have read carefully what
tho Landmark says. but we cannot see
that its argument has strengthened Its
posi.ion or weakened ours. In fact, our
Norfolk contemporary seems sometimes
to be on our SIDE Here. for instance. Is
one sentence from It's last article. 1t
says:
'Tf n LEGISLATURE fresh from the people
Is not to be trusted. IL speaks badly for
the people"
We should make that sentence read as
follows:
.If the people themselves are not TO be
trusted, il speaks badly for the people
This Is a government OF the people. by
the people. for the people. and yet 1t is
deliberately contended that in this gov
ernmen; by the people the people are not
10 be allowed 10 elect their United states
senator's We are gravely tod that an
Election In the second degree Is more
likely 10 produce good results than an
election in the frs; degree. All the ar
yumen:s of our Norfolk contemporary and
TIE people who agree with II are basei
upon the assumption that the people are
not 10 be trusted 10 take care OF their
own interests The argument proves too
much. Why does II not apply in the case
Of the election OF the Governors OF the
several States? Are the same people who
are competent 10 choose n Governor In
competent 10 choose n United States sena-
tor? We cannot understand why the
same men should be intelligent. trust
worthy voters when a Governor is to be
elected. and uninielligent untrustworthy
voters when a United States senator Is
20 be elected.
The Landmark advises us to propose to
ourselves the following query:
IF the people cannot be trusted to elect
members Of General Assembly honest
enough not 20 be corrupted, how can they
be trusted 10 elect United States senators
hy direct vote with more certainty OF
not going wronS|
We beg leave TO turn that query also
over 70 the Landmark by making 1t read
es follows:
IF the people can be trusted 10 elect
members OF a General Assembly honest
enough not 10 he corrupted, why can
they not be trusted TO elect United States
senator's?
The whole argument turns upon this
point: II the people cannot be en-
trusted with the election of United States
senator's then the people cannot be trusted
with the election OF the General Assembly
which chooses those senator's.
In reply to what we said as 10 the flf-
teen new amendments, the Landmark
lsks:
but, we answer. were not all these adj
oltlons to, rather than radical changes in
the Constitution. except In the matter OF
race. color, and previous condition of
servitude'-the elective franchise? We
think So
The first amendment provides that Con-
gress shall make no law respecting an
establishment OF religion. or prohibiting
the free exercise OF religion. or abrldslns
the freedom OF speech or of the press;
or the right OF the people to assemble
and petition the government for re-
dress OF grievances. What would the
Federal Constitution bs without these
amendments?-the tenth. for example.
We quote 1t:
The powers not delegated 70 the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by IL 20 the States, are reserved to the
States respectively or to the people"
''Or TO the people" That phrase does
not read as II the fathers were afraid
- trust the people.
But enough,