Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-02-29
pruIcn m COMMITTEE.


We ind the community. or at least the
greater portion OF II. still indignant al 'he
denial TO our people OF the privilege OF
voting upon the proposed changes In our
municipal system.
The objection that the amendments
were TO be submitted 10 whites ana
blacks alike does not hold good. since
II has been shown that nothing wouid
be easier than for the Democrats OF
this city TO precede a special election
with a primary. In that way the sense
Of the whites could be taken on the
amendments, and as Is usual IN sueh
cases the minority would be bound By the
action OF the majority.
But not only has the public voice been
suppressed. but the bills are to be stified
TO death in the House committee Ihe
postpohement OF the consideration Oh
them by the committee until next Tues
day. the last day OF the session, means
as everybody knows, that they are 10
be buried alive Thus there win be no
discussion of them in the House; no
rolI-call to put upon record the position
OF the Richmond members or OF any
other members.
Now. candidly, DID not the prayer OF
the Chamber of Commerce. OF the Grain
and Cotton Exchange, and of the To-
bacco Trade deserve better treatment!
Should not these worthy gentlemen have
had kinder consideration? They are
Democrats. almost to man, and was
1t good policy, was 1t fair play, that they
should have been dealt with 80 sum-
marily?
II cannot but be that the course fol-
lowed will leave a feeling OF irritation;
IL cannot but be that IT Will prove harm
ful 10 the best interests OF our party
here The amendments might have been
voted down, but they should have been
submitted. The people should have been
trusted in this matter II they didn't
wish the amendments they could have
said so. The very fact that the bills
have been side-tracked goes 10 show that
these who were instrumental in securing
this disposition OF them are far from
being satisfied with their course in this
matter.
A country member of the House Com
mittee on Counties. Cities. and Towns.
wishes the Dispatch to say that IL was
through no fault OF the country mem
bers Of the committee that these bills
were not reported; that they only fol-
low ed the usage in such cases in agree
ing that the bills should be postponed
when they were requested that this be done
by a city member. True. and We have so
said. Indeed, long before the Chamber
of Commerce placed its bills in the hands
of the Richmond delegation. this paper
called the formers attention TO this
usase-the control Of local bills by the
local straightforward said that If our
delegation wished the bills passed no
voice would be raised In objection. The
Chamber recognized that this was the
practice and the Chambers Legislative
Committee had several conferences with
our delegation and so framed their bills
as TO meet the objections raised by our
legislators. The position OF Colonel Har-
wood was. We believe, different from that
OF any other member. At any rate, he
did not consent TO support the bills unless
previously submitted TO a Democratic
primary; but he stated TO a representa-
tive of the Chamber Of Commerce that
IL the bills were reported favorably he
would not make a fight upon them on
the floor OF the House." And we are
further informed that he declined to
support the amendment proposed by the
City Council unless IL was previously ap-
proved at a primary.