Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-03-13
THE LyNcHnuRG CONFERENCE.

Al the conference Of Populist leaders
held at Lynchburg night before last,
resolution was adopted favoring the hold
ing of a constitutional convention. ''for
the purpose Of reducing the heavy bur
den of taxation-State. county, and mu-
nicipal"; also demanding that " non
partisan election-law be enacted that viii
secure n free and fair expression Of an
the voters Of the State in the selection
of delegates to such a constitutional con-
vention."
The Populist party is, therefore. the
first party to declare I'm favor Of con-
stitItional convention. The Republican
marty through its last State convention,
emphatically denounced the constitution
al . convention project and declared
against it. The State Democratic Con-
vention. following soon afterwards
handled the subject very guardedly.
While defending the motives of our mem
bers OF the Legislature, who thought 1t
well for the people to vote upon this
question, it studiously refrained and
avoided committing our party to the con-
stitutional-convention scheme. So. while
the Populist party has committed itself
in favor Of a constitutional convention
and tire Republican party has committed
itself against ii, Democrats are entirely
free to vote for or against the pro-
position, as their judgment dictates.
Many, we know. win vote for conven-
ton: many others. we are equally GER
tain. will vote against calling it at this
time.
Thousands would like to see an amend
ment adopted. restricting the right Of
suffrage. but they cannot believe public
opinion IL yet ripe for that change. And
a constitutional convention that did not
deal effectually with that great question
could not half way meet the demands Of
the situation.
The demand Of the Lynchburg confer
ence for a non-partisan election-law can
not be made upon members of the l.egis'
lature until the constitutlonal-convent
question has been decided. Our voters
will say yes or no upon the constitu-
fional-convention question In May,
whereas, the election of members of the
Legislature will not take place until No
yember So here is a condition that cam
not be enforced. for the convention will
have been ordered Gf it is TO be ordereO
before legislative action can be had.
But has there ever been, anywhere, at
any time. a "non-partisan" electionLaw?
So far as we know, in every State, in
every country. the election-laws passed
are more or less favorable to the party
in power 1t has always been so; it
will always be so. we have no doubt.
However TO come TO the case in point,
II the existing Virginia election-law
should prove good enough to order a con-
stItutional convention with, why should it
not prove good enough to elect members
of the convention with? Why, indeed?
However, the Virginia Populists are
now committed in favor of calling
constitutional convention; and, moreover,
Il is the only party in Virginia that is
so communicable Republicans. as we
have said, being committed to the oppo-
site view, while the Depocratic party is
neutral.
The constitutional-conven question
coming election. Ordinarily, our May
elections are devoid Of general interest.
In this city. the only officer we have to
elect In May. 1897. IS the City Treasurer.
In the country. county officers are TO be
elected: but the constitutional-conyen
question then 10 be disposed OF will give
this May election far-reaching import
ance.
In the discussion OF the possibility OF
retrenching public expenses through con-
stitutional amendments, We hope that
no one will lose sight Of the fact that
by far the greater part OF Virginia's ex-
penses are to meet the interest upon her
public debt, and for purposes Of public
education. Neither OF these items can
be reduced much. When attention is
called 10 the fact that Virginia spends
so much more money than either Georgia
or North Carolina. let this fact be kept
1p mind.
Whether a constitutional convention