The Washington times., 1901-09-06
THE PLEDGE TO VIRGINIA
Delegate Glass Declares no Review
by Negro Was Meant.
No Intention of Submitting the Re-
suit of the Constitutional Conven-
ton to the Co1ored Voters-An An
swcr to the Address of MIR. Flood.

suit of the Constitutional Conven
ton to the Co1ored VOters-An An
swcr to the Address of MIR. Flood
| RICHMOND, Va, Sept. 5.-The CLOSING
day of the debate on the preamble anC
| Bill of Rights brought immense
| crowd to the convention hall today. Tn,
complexion of the audience was in strik
| ing contrast with that for the past sew
eral DAYS the number of negroes in at.
tendance dwindlng to seven when tbs
roll was called.
| A J. Montague, Beverley Harrison, ]
! Taylor Ellyson, Capt. r. E. Freeman
and other distinguished gentlemen were
on the floor.
President Goode called the body to or
der at IL o'clock, prayer being offered
by the Rev, C. p. Scott, of Barton
Heights. Several memorials protesting
! against sectarian appropriations, the tax
alton of secret orders and favoring the
Barbour resolution regulating the liquor
traffic. were received.
Delegate McIlwaine, arising to a quel.-
tion of personal privilege, corrected what
purported TO be his language in the
speech made by Mr.. Wysor yesterday.
He denied that he had used the Ian
guage attributed to him. though he did
not believe that the gentleman from
Pulaski had Intentionally misrepresented
him. He read from his remarks as re-
ported by the stenographer.
MIR. Wysor. in replying. said that a
reading of his speech would show that he
had not misrepresented the gentleman
from Prince Edward.
Mr.. QuarIes, of Augusta, offered a
the time for closing the debate through
out the days session.
Delegate Robertson. of Roanoke, Of
fered the following, which was adopted
and then reconsidered until after the con-
clusion of the debate:
Resolved. That after the closing of the
debate today. the consideration of the
preamble to the constitution and all the
pending amendments be postponed until
after the convention had adopted the sub
stance of the constitution and that after
that time the Committee of the Whole be
discharged from the consideration thereof
until the further order of the conven-
ton"
The convention resolved itself into Com
mittee of the Whole and the preamble
and Bill of Rights was laid before the
committee.
Delegate Flood, of Appomattox. was
recognized. He felt called upon, in view
Of the part he had taken. in the legisla-
tion calling the convention, to explain
his position in the matter. He impugned
no mans motives, votes, or views. But
with all the intensity of his nature, he
declared that there was moral obliga-
tion that the work of the convention
should be submitted to the people for rati-
hcation. In view of the pledge made at
Norfolk, he denied that the convention
had the right TO proclaim the new con-
stitution. The convention of lS29-1s30 had
submitted its work to an electorate, and
the doctrine prevailing In the State was
that the constitutions should be sub
mitted
The pledge committing the Democratic
party OF the State was written by the dis
tinguished gentleman from Lynchburg
The pledge said the people,
Replying to question by Mr. Meredith
as to whether he tFlood) would have
voted for the resolution had he under
stood that it was essential to securing the
pledge of the convention to make it a
party issue. he said: IF that was your
intention why did you not deal candidly
with the Democratic masses and declare
that the new constitution should be sub
mitted to the abridged electorate provided
by that constitution? Why did you juggie
with the people in a double sense and
keep the word of promise to the ear and
break IL to the hope?" This was greeted
with immense applause.
Il believe said Mr.. Flood "in dealing
honestly with the people. l interpreted
the pledge to mean exactly what it said
Applause greeted this reply. The Demo-
cratic platform said what it meant. and
meant what 1t said. No discrimination
was made in the language of the resolu-
tion, and he could imagine no other OBJ
maxim, THAT the end justified the
means Mr.. Flood. in his speech. eulo-
gized Senator Daniel, which evoked
rounds of applause.
Delegate Glass. of Lynchburg, the
champion of submitting to an abridged
electorate, spoke earnestly, though he
was scarcely able. physically to make
the effort. Taking the Underwood con-
stltution, Mr.. Glass challenged any man
on the floor to question his action or vote
either upon the ground of Legality or NOR
ality. He would never vote to permit 1i6,-
coo illiterate negroes to review the work
of n representative Virginia gentleman.
His position was known on this ques-
ton when ne was elected, the contest
having been made on that point. He re-
ferred to a conference at the recent Nor
folk convention. in which Senator Daniel
Judge Mann and others stated that ii was
competent for the convention to submit
It's work to an abridged electorate. over
two hundred men were present, and il was
he unanimous opinion that the constitution
should be submitted to an abridged cleo
torate. with the exception of one man who
voted always for proclamation. Mr. Glass
defended the pledge holding that IL was
never contemplated that the negroes
were to be called upon to vote for the
Would the Democrats urge
negroes to vote for anything that the
white people favored? Would any man |
contend that negroes were to be consid- |
ared? The Republicans at Norfolk had |
denounced the Flood resolution as a fraud !
and were pledged to vote against its every |
provision.