Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-05-19
FRIDAY....M MAY 10, 1899
THE REorEsr YKEFERRED.

The Hon. William A. Anderson, of Rock
bridge. yesterday waited upon Chairman
Illyson and laid before him a formal re-
ouest that the state Democratic Com
mittee might be convened TO consider a
memorial setting forth the action OF the
May meeting. The chairman later in the
day Informed Mr.. Anderson that he would
call a meeting of the committee upon
date 10 be fixed hereafter.
If our state Committee should agree 10
call a State convention, we suppose the
can would set forth that the convention
would be asked 'to consider matters Of
party interest relating TO the nomination
and election of United States senators"
or words TO that effect.
We kiSw, as well as any of our con-
Temperatures who have logged us on the
subject, that 1t is not for the State Com
mittee to indicate a policy for State
convention to pursue; but 1t would be
proper Tor the committee TO specify the
reason for converting it.
Once assembled, the State convention
would have the reins entirely in its own
hands 1t could nominate or not, as it
pleased, or it might order State pri-
mary. or it might dismiss the whole sub
Ject without any action at all.
The Dispatch has never for one moment
oontended that it was in the power Of
any other body than State convention
to adopt a policy for our party. We
have time and again declared that the
State Committee is without legislative
power.
The resolutions adopted by the May
conference were by 10 means as accu-
rately phrased as they might have
been: but we may be sure ii was never
intended to ask the State Committee TO
90 anything 1t has no right to do. When
the State Committee is asked TO provide
q State convention for the nomination Of
a senator, all that is meant is To move
the State Committee TO initiate such mea-
sures as would be proper TO secure that
end.
IT, in the opinion Of the state Commit
tee, the interests of our party require That
"A State convention shall be convened TO
consider matters pertaining to the nomi-
nation and election of senators, we think
there is nothing in the record of the
Roanoke Convention forbidding II to do
so. The Roanoke Convention decided but
Two things-namely: CD That State con-
yention, whether called for such pur-
pose or not, may. If ii chooses to do 50,
commit our party absolutely and unre-
seryedly 20 the support Of candidate
for the Senate, and % that 1t was not in
favor of nominating Il candidate for the
Senate in 1899 by a State primary cleo
ton.
IL would have been absurd for the Roa-
noke Convention, after having chosen a
candidate for the Senate, to proclaim its
hostility 20 that method of selection
and il did nothing of the kind. Think OF
the rldicule it would have brought upon
itself IL IT had made any such declara-
ton! And yet several of our exchanges
are persistent in the view that the Roa-
noke convention discounteuanced every
method of nomination, save only that
one which had heretofore prevailed IN
Virginia. Oh, no, Action speaks louder
than words, and by its action the Roa-
noke Convention disapproved the State
primary-election scheme in one case and
in another approved a nomination by
convention.
We shall not undertake to foreshadow
the action of the State Committee upor
the questions TO be brought before it,
We doubt If any man is qualified to dc
30 at this time. Much may depend upor
circumstances. We take it for granted
however, that the memorialists will pre-
sent their case in good temper and spirit
that those who will oppose their re
quests will be equally as considerate, ant
that the conclusions OF the committee
win be rendered with that judicial calm
ness characteristic of IT, Then, no mattoi
what may be the issue Of the controversy
before the committee. its Judgment vii
be cheerfully accepted