Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-03-01
Nh: DAWSON AND THE CHARTER


legislative committee concerning the
Chamber OF Commerce's charter ameho-
ments.
That he had the right to appear BEFORE
the committee and express his views as
private citizen. or club representative
we are not disposed to question. we take
Il for granted that he explained 10 the
committee that he only spoke for him.
self and his club. and II so. there couIu
have been no misunderstanding OF MS
position. But we cannot praise MN TOT
saving that the amendments In question
were advocated "by some Of the men,
| bers of the Chamber OF Commerce
The amendments were adVoca'eo
by the Chamber OF Commerce Itself.
They were under consideration by the
Chamber or it's committee for severai
months. one or more members OF the
| CITY Council were invited to appear ana
give their views upon them. Moreover
the meeting OF the Chamber at which
the amendments were approved was held
after every member OF the Chamber hau
been notified thereof by mail and through
the press.
Furthermore. this meeting was attend
ed by a very great number or members.
and again speeches were made TOT ana
against the amendments; but. when the
vote was taken, we believe that only one
member CNr. Curtls) voted mo" And
so we submit that 1t Is unfair to the
Chamber for Mr.. Dawson TO say, as he
does. that the amendments were "ad-
vocated by some OF the members OF the
Chamber OF Commerce.
That all Of the members OF the Cham
Der of Commerce were not present we
admit: but the action taken was the
action of the Chamber, and any sugges-
ton that II was the action OF some
does Injustice 10 the officers OF the
Chamber, who were so painstaking In
their care that each member should be
notified Of the meeting and its purpose.
We dare say that all OF the members OF
the Clay-Ward Actives, which organiza-
ton requested Mr.. Dawson to appear
against the amendments, were not pres
ent when that action was taken. But
did Mr.. Dawson begin his speech to the
legislative committee by saying that he
appeared as the representative OF some
of the CIay-Ward Actives? We guess
not.
Mr. Dawson condemns any attempt TO
force" upon our people charter amend
ments that have not been first approved
by the vote OF the people at the polls.
If this is his position. and he wishes to
be considered non-partisan. we sub
nit that 1t is incumbent upon him TO
show that he was equally active and
pronounced against the amendment pro-
posed by the City Council. We do
not remember that Mr.. Dawson made
any public speech demanding that the
Council amendment should first be sub
mitted to Democratic primary. Ger
tain we are that he did not write let
ter to the Dispatch, Insisting that, be-
fore the Councils amendment should be
passed upon by the Legislature, 1t should
first be submitted to vote OF the Demo
Gratis OF this city.
Now, what was the Councils amend
ment as 10 which Mr.. Dawson was silent,
so far as the Dispatch was Informed?
Why. II proposed to tear to pieces the
results Of last falls primary 1t pro-
posed TO undermine and topple over the
Board OF Public Interests! 1t proposed
TO allow the City Council 10 20 outside
the list OF nominees furnished II by
this board to select Police Commissioners
and Fire Commissioners Did the Coun-
Gil offer to submit this amendment to the
people? No. Did we hear Mr.. Daw-
sons voice publicly urging that the
Councils amendment should not be con-
sidered until the vote OF the people was
previously taken? Not that We remem-
Der.
II Mr.. Dawson had come 10 the front
as soon az the City Councils amendment
was published. and said to the legisla-
tors and to the Council: Gentlemen, this
won't do: this amendment should not
be adopted until the Democrats OF Rich
mond have first approved IT," his posi-
ton would now be well-nigh impregna-
BILE. But, as the saying Is. on the con-
trary, II is quite the reverse.
OF course with the Legislatures ses-
sion far advanced, as 1t was, It was
wholly impracticable for the Chamber
| of Commerce to agree that its amend
ments should be approved by the Demo-
| Gratis of Richmond, previous TO their
being acted upon by the Legislature.
| For the Chamber 10 have agreed upon
| this course would have been for ii 70
have agreed to postpone all action for
| two years; and so. after several con-
| ferences with the Richmond delegation,
| the Chamber accepted suggestions made
| to 1t, and agreed to have the amendments
| submitted to the voters OF Richmond at
| a special election.
OF course. the Chamber Of Commerce
| knew and the Richmond delegation
| knew that the Legislature OF Virginia
could not submit any act of theirs to
| a Democratic or Republican primary. OF
| course, no such thing was seriously men
| toned; but in due season the Dispatch
suggested a Democratic primary TO pre-
cede the special election. We under
take TO say that. If the Legislature
would pass the Chambers bills (Which
| it could do even now, with united
action. upon the part of the Richmond
| delegation. there would be d general
and joyful acquiescence in the idea that
a primary be held week or more before
| the special election. The Dispatch Is
| committed to this view, and we pledge
| Mr.. Dawson and the Richmond delega-
| ton our best abilities and our most en-
ergetic efforts In this direction. Now. let
| them get the bills through.
Quite a number of our contemporaries