Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1901-06-20
THURSDAY, JUNE 20, 1901.
REFUSED TO TAKE OATH.

conscientious spirit in its work of framing
a new constitution for the Commonwealth
But the very first meeting brought forth
disposition on the part OF the majority that
shows conclusively its purpose to violate
the supreme law of the land. A lesolu'
ton was offered by an able Democratic
lawyer calling for the taking of an oath by
the delegates before they proceeded TO
work. This provoked debate; some OF
the Democratic leaders asserting that they
would quit the convention before they
wonld subscribe TO an oath which would
REQUIRE them to obey the Constitution and
the laws of the United States and the
Constitution and laws of the State of Nir-
ginia. They pretended to believe that as
representatives of the people they are dis
charged of all official responsibility, and are
authorized to make new organic law Tor
the State without regard to the require
ments of the present Constitutions, State
and Federal, thus evidencing their pur-
pose to commit violence to both, if tbey
have behind them sufficient numbers inn
bued with dangerous revolutionary
spirit. If such was not their purpose, why
did they object to taking the oath? The
remarks of Mr.. Carter Glass, who violently
opposed the resolution and who declared
he would suffer himself TO be expelled
from the convention before he would take
the oath, disclosed the fact that radical
step is to be taken on the suffrage ques-
ton, a step which will violate tile Federal
Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the
provisions of our present State Constitu'
ton.
Though the convention WIS called in
the manner and the delegates thereto cleo
ted in the mode prescribed by cur State
Constitution, these men claim that they
are not bound = its provisions unless
they take an official oath. This is not
true. The or,s sent Constitution stands as
the supreme law of the State until it is
superseded by another constitution framed
by the convention and adopted by the
qualified voters of'the State. The Bill of
Rights declares that the citizens are not
"bound by any law to which they have
not in like manner assented, for the pub
lie good" and the contention of these
revolutionists that they have right to
make a Constitution ann have it become
the supreme law without it being submit
ted to the people for ratification, or to sub
init it to restricted electorate, az they
please, is in violation both of the Con-
stitutional and natural rights of citizens.
The delegates who were unwilling to
take the oath did not wish to be fettered
by that section of the Bill Of Rights, as
now embodied In the Constitution of
Virginia, which says:
''That the Constitution Of the United
States, and the laws of Congress passed In
pursuance thereof constitute the supreme
law of the land, to which paramount ale
glance and obedience are due from every
citizen, anything in the constitution, ordi-
nances or laws of any State to the contrary
Notwithstanding"
When the Constitution of Virginia was
ratified, with the above provision in it,
most Of the delegates who are now seeking
TO avoid taking an oath to support it,
voted for the ratification of the Constitu-
ton. How do they expect to acquit them
selves of its binding effects on each and
aIl'of them? Can it be done by not TAX
ing an oath, as delegate to the conven'
ton, to support the Constitution? A great
many of the members of this convention,
among them Senator Daniel and Hon.
John Goode (who is President of the con-
yention) have heretofore taken the oath to
support the Constitution of Virginia and
of the United States. Were those oaths
binding temporarily, or do they cont nue.
to bind? Can these gentlemen aCquit
themselves of the binding effects of such
oaths by not taking the oath again, and
vote for measures that will conflict with
and violate the constitutions they have
heretofore sworn they would maintain and
support?
There can be no doubt that the refusal
to take an oath was based upon the pur-
pose and desire of the majority of the con-
yention to disregard the Constitution Of
the United States and the Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights, upon which our State
sovereignty was founded, and upon which
it is still based, declares
''That all elections ought to be free, and
that all men. having sufficient evidence of
permanent interests with, and attachment
to the community, have the right of suf-
frage."
1t is the purpose of the revolutionists to
violate this provision of tie Bill of Rights,
and they want to escape responsibility by
...c,s;,o, IN take an oath to not violate the