Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1902-06-05
SUBSCRIPTIONS.
THURSDAY. JUNE 5. 1902.
cowARDICE PERfIOY! UsURPATION

of the so.called Constitutional Convention,
a reckless and defiant minority, have pro-
claimed an instrument they call the Con
stitution Of Virginia. No more conscience
less act has ever been done by any body
of men claiming to be the representatives
of the people with delegated authority to
make organic or statute law.
Was it a cowardly act? Yea. 1t shows
that the partisan ring which is trying to
establish its absolute political power per
manently IN Virginia is afraid to let the
people pass in ju lgment upon the work of
the Convention. If these men have any
political conscience it has made towards
of them. They are afraid to meet public
sentiment at the polls, knowing full well
that their revolutionary acts would be
discredited by the honest and intelligent
masses. As it is, they will 60 down in
history as political towards, unwilling to
meet outraged public sentiment in fair,
honest combat.
Is it per6dious conduct? Yea. If the
violation Of solemn party pledge and in
dlvidual representations and solicitations
by Democratic candidates and speakers
do not constitute perfdy, what does? 1t
is the worst kind OF perfdy, because the
pledge was made for violation at the be-
ginning. The promise to submit the
Constitution to the people for ra1 fcatiOn
or rejection was given with tine fixed pur-
pose of not keeping it. The effort of the
author of the resolution for submission i'll
the Democratic platform of 1900 to change
the plain English meaning of that resolu.
tion, and his subsequent vote, as member
of the Constitutional Convention, for proc
lamation, is proof conclusive Of the primal
insincerity of the pledge. Such malevo-
lent deception intensiies the perfdy, and
makes it one of the gravest political crimes
ever committed in a state pretending to
have Republican form of government
where the people are said to be sovereign
and where representative men are
claimed TO be patriotic and true.
Was this act of proclamation usurpa-
ton? Yea, verify. 1t was violation of
law and precedent. The present Gov
ernor of Virginia, while Attorney General
of the State, writing on this question of
submission, said:
"The very. genius of free government,
in my opinion, requires such submission.
can perceive no reason for departing
from the wise and just precedents of the
fathers, or from the fundamental principle
underlying the making Of all COnstitu-
tons, by giving to any Convention the
right to make Constitution without sub
hitting it 10 the people for ratification or
rejection"
NosUch right as the prOclaiming of the
new Constitution was ever given the
RuInp. Upon the contrary that right or
privilege was specifically withheld. If it
had ever been understood that such action
would have been taken, as proclaiming the
Constitution, the machine, with all its
facilities for stul!ing ballot boxes and falsl-
flying returns, could not have secured a
majority for holding a convention Not
o1ly was the right to proclaim not given
but the Act of the General Assembly pro-
viding for the election of members of the
Convention required the Constitution to
be submitted to the people for ratification
or rejection. So, a minority of the Con-
vention has usurped an authority that is
dangerous to republican government, in
that its plain purpose is the establishment
of an oligarchy in Virginia. 1t is a revo-
lutionary proceeding that will, if it be-
comes necessary, justify a counter-revo'
luton on the part of the people. 1t would
be better even if we had some Cromwell
living who had the power and the courage
to go into the hall where the Rump is sit
ting, take the gavel from the presi-
dents hand, seize him by the throat and
throw him and all the perfdious procla'
mationists from the once honored legisla |
tive halls of this Commonwealth, from the |
capitol built by Thomas Jefferson the
great tribune of the people.