The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-02-23

&
CATION to Congress. g. -
The Senator said the object of this act
was to put manhood above money. $3.50
SIR. Barksdale was asked by Mr.. Flood
how much money each: political party
would be permitted to expend in Virginia
in the coming Presidential election.
The Halifax Senator replied that his
bill allowed ...o use of money for legiti-
mate expenses. and limited 1t to $500 to
each candidate upon the basis of 5000
voters.
Mr., Barksdale said he did not believe
any senator could afford to vote against
the great principle underlying this bill.
If it was Imperfect he was willing to
accept amendments.
Mr. Barkedale said 1T did not become
any one TO throw stones at the De-
mocracy of Halifax He was proud OF
what his county had done for the Demo-
cratic party.
The Senator said he had submitted his
bill to Attorney General Montague and
asked his opinion as to the constitution
ality of the act. Mr.. Montague saw no.
thing in it inconsistent with the funda-
mental law.
A SURPRISE.
Mr.. Barksdae sprang surprise by
reading letters from Representatives
Champ Clark and D. A. De Armond
Missouri, and Acknowledgement Grow,
all praising the law in force In that
State and telling of how beneficially 1t
had operated. The Senator said he had
received letters from many of the best
people of the State approving OF this
measure. He concluded with an eloquent
appeal to the Senate to pass the bill.
Sena tor Lupton said he did not think
the Senators had attached as much inn
HE cd
With view to having the measure per-
fected, he moved to recommit it.
Senator Flood stated that the commit
tee had given careful consideration to
this measure. If the objectionable fea-
lures had been stricken out nothing
would have been left of it. He stated
that while this was called an act to pre-
vent the corrupt use OF money in cleo
lions under its provisions the largest
corruption fund ever used in Virginia,
save in the year 1906, could be used.
Each candidate was permitted to use 500
for every 5000 voters, and this would
mean from $4,000 to $4,000 in each coun-
ty.
Mr.. Flood argued that the laws on the
statute books at the present time are
sufficient to punish all manner of cor
rupt use of money in elections.
RECOMMlTTED.
Mr.. Barksdale consented to amend the
bill so as to strike out the provision al
lowing each candidate to spend 800 Cor
ca ch 5000 voters and to allow only actual
expenses. He was opposed to recommlt-
ting the bill. which meant its defeat He
wanted a square vote upon the measure.
The motion to recommit was lost by q
vote of ayes "A, noes 10.
Senator Munford stated that he OBJ
iccted to some of the provisions of the
bill. but he was going to vote for it.
The penalties were too heavy. in his
jud gment. He admired the provision re-
curing candidates to furnish for publ
cation after elections sworn statements
of the money spent. The practice OF
using money in elections was growing
too rapidly, and a check should be put
upon it.
The vote by which the Senate refused
to recommt the bill was reconsidered,
and the bill was sent back to the Com
mittee on Privileges and Elections
House Proceedings.
The House was opened without prayer.
Mr.. Duke, Of Charlottesville, offered
a joint resolution, providing that the
hour OF 1880 be fixed as the time for
elccting a judge for the Corporation
Court Of the city of Charlottesville. The
resolution was agreed to and Mr.. Duke
communicated the same to the Senate.
.ject of pensions during the morning hour.
Mr. Boaz, chairman of the Finance Cons
mittee, asked that the bill reported from
the committee of which Mr.. Parks is
patron, be placed on the calendar Mr..
Petit, of E'luvanna. and Mr.. Gravcly,
OF Henry, made speeches asking that the
committee be discharged from the fur
Their consideration of the formers bill
The hour for the execution of the joint
Geo., ~ x111>,
the pension matter was cut off.
Hon. w. r. Duke nominated Senator
George w. Morris for judge of Corpora
ton Court of Charlottesville, and his
nomination was seconded by Hon. w. II.
Boaz, of Albemarle.
No other name was put in nomination
and Hon. George w. Morris, having re-
ceived all the votes cast, was declared
elected. When the vote was announced
Mr.. Gravely resumed his speech in sup
port of his motion. He said that the
old soldiers of the State had asked for
bread and the Finance Committee had
offered them a stone.
Mr.. Fokes, of Richmond, defended the
action of the committee, and on its part
resented the imputatiOn of Mr.. Gravely.
Mr.. Gravely finally withdrew his mo-
ton.
Mr. Gent, of RUSSELL asked that the
finance COMMITTEE DE dlScnarScu from
the further consideration of his bill, pro-
viding that the circuit courts appoint
one of their commissioners to assess fidu-
Charles. The House refused to discharge
the committee. The same request was
made by Mr.. Fitzpatrick, of Nelson in
regard to Il bill for the relief of a. G.
Loving, with the same result.
TRAVELLING AUDITORS.
When the Glass Travelling Auditors
bill was reached on the calendar, Mr.
Saunders. Of Franklin, took the floor and
made very able speech in favor of its
passage. He pointed out the necessity
for such a measure, and called attention
to the losses sustained by the State by
failure Of the State to properly audit the
accounts Of its officers.
Mr.. Saunders was questioned by num-
Der of members who were opposed to the
bill, and answered them to the seeming
satisfaction of the House.
Captain J. c.. Gent, of Russell, spoke
against the BILL and contended that it
was unnecessary. He was followed by
Hon. D. S. Pollock, of Pulaski, who
made vigorous speech in opposition.
He not only thought the bill unneces-
sary. but did not believe its passage
II s~.-f1