Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1902-03-14
Friday, March Ia. 1902.
THE KILMARNocK CHARTER.

comment. There were few people
previously cognizant of its features,
particularly those provisions bearing
on taxes and liquor. The opposition
within Kilmarnock's bounds has
taken the form of petition signed
by forty some citizens, requesting
the Legislature not to grant the
charter.
We have been assured by some of
the promoters, who are honorable
gentlemen, that the movement did
not have rise in desire to evade
existing local option laws-although
the liquor provisions in the docu-
ment would have that effect-and
that in this respect they had been
misunderstood and consequently mis-
represented. They now promise to
ask an amendment to the proposed
liquor provision such as will bring
the town under whatever liquor laws
may prevail in White Stone magis
terial district. In view of their dis
claimer and the proposed modifica-
ton of the charter the CITIZEN, as
far as it speaks for the temperance
element of the district, is glad to be
able to put these gentlemen in
right light and will waive any fur
Their objection to the granting of the
charter. AS stated in previous ar
ticles on this subject we were OF no
mind to pass in Judgment upon the
action of our sister village in so far
as 1T did not affect the rest of the
county; and we now say, that while
some Of the other provisions might
be amended with benefit to the pro-
posed town and the county at large,
anything further that we may say
upon the subject will be in the ma
ture of friendly criticism ana advice,
to be taken for what it is worth.
We are on record as favoring a
State dispensary system for the
county of Lancaster in preference
to existing conditions, and did such
a law obtain Kilmarnock might as
freely avail itself Of the law as any
other section of our county. In the
absence of such dispensary law it
would hardly be fair even to grant
kilmarnock charter unless it recit-
edawiliingness to conform to the pres
ent local option law. There can be no
argument in claiming that local self
government is abused in the position
we take. A man might draw a line
around his store or farm and plead
to be permitted to sell liquor there
because he and his family were in
the majority and desired to do so.
The illustration holds good as to
Kilmarnock or any of our other vii
lagos in this section. The surround
ing country is almost wholly de-
pendent upon the various villages
for trade, and is thereby affected by
whatever transpires at its business
centre. We presume that it was
for this reason our statutes pre-
scribe that the vote on local option
must be carried by districts and not
by precincts.
Though we do not raise the ques-
ton it is still unfair to hold that
the proposed town he exempt from
one-half of the county levy. This
is too much concession on the part
OF the county. Should each and
every one of our business centres de-
sire to be Incorporated and ask
similar exemption the farms of the
county would have to be assessed at
an exorbitant tax in order to defray
the county's expenses.
The question of bonding the town
upon 30-year loan we think would
not be feasible, and it might be
question if the county or some of ]
It's realty would not be liable for 4
payment of any such bonds should
the town. after few years. trial, |
ask that their charter be repealed.
These are the main features, as !
they strike US, that would appeal I
for modification.
Should our friends of KlImarnock .
desire to be chartered upon a reason 8
able basis we would be glad to see
it done. In any case they will find,
however, that an incorporated viii v
lage is not what it is Cracked up to s
be-" incorporation does not injure Il
the county's finances it must neces- s
'arily over-tax the town-people to a
meet expenses for carrying on the b
local government.
Ii Is said that the James river floods
saye mace the oysters sick. We are e