Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1897-03-06
lis people and State; because he de:


clines publicly to violate his self re
spect, and stutify himself by making
public confession that he has done
wrong before he or anyone else
knows whether the law is good OF
bad in it's workings, or whether or
not any wrong has yet been done
The position assumed by Country
man. in this matter is to my mind
not only illogical, intolerant and alb
surd, but inexcusabe almost for a
man of his evident intelligence and
thoughtfulness to occupy. think
that those who took part in passing
the law, now recognize the fact that
it is not Just what it should be in all
respects, and that it should be so
amended as to get rid as for as pos
sible of the Objectionable features in
it, but in such a way, however, as to
preserve to the people and taxpayers
of the State the original intent and
effect OF the law-the reduction of
expenses and taxation. 1t seems to
me that this would be a sensible and
reasonable way to deal with the
matter. Yet "Countryman" says in
effect, to those men, repeal the law
or wont support you'll Country =
man and X both seem to assume that
the people are behind them in de-
manding the repeal of the law. This
is pure and undefiled audacity and
assumption on their part. The peo-
pie want no such thing What they
do want is chance first to try the
law, and then they will be for it's
amendment perhaps, but never for
it's entire repeal. So far as l am IN
formed, believe that there is only
one class of people in the State that
particularly desire the repeal OF the
law, and that class consists mainly of
those individuals, whose incomes
have been perhaps reduced by it's
operations. Certainly the cry for
its repeal will never come from
taxpayers, but rather from those
who don't now receive as great
part of the public money
as they used to. Friend Country
man" is rather unfortunate in his
efforts to expose my identity. The
introduction OF this element in this
discussion is entirely uncalled for. |
can discover no connection whatever
between my personality and the
question at issue. Were q Lord
Mayor or an humble teamster, | can
see no reason why this discussion or
it's merits should be effected thereby.
Truth is truth, even though liar
gives it utterance, and reason is no
less forceful because it proceeds from
the tongue and brain of fool. l
cannot see what my position on the
money question, or the fact that | do
or do not hold an office has got to do
with this controversy. Certainly l
am not affected in any way by the
issue, let it result as it may, except
SO far as any other taxpayer and cit
izen might be affected. Can 'Coun-
trymann say as much? Honor bright
now, old Country" Very early in
life | learned to some extent the
force of the old saying, THAT man
who lives in glass house shouldn' t
throw stones" "Countryman" are
you in q glass house? Are you IN
such a position that by the law whose
repeal you demand at the hands OF
your representative as condition OF
your support, your income has in
any way been cut down? And on the
other hand, would it not in your
opinion be increased by its entire re
peal? l won't press you for an an
swer to these questions, | merely
offer them for your consideration.
Bobby Burns gives us the following:
But, ochl mankind are unco weak,
And little to be trusted.
If self the wavering balance shake,
It's rarely right adjusted"
These lines are offered merely as a
suggestion to the public, and not as
an intimation that 1 believe "Coun-
tryman'' assumes and defends his
position from selfish motives alone, l
am sure this cannot be true.
CITYMAN.