The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-07
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER Z, 1908.
PARTY ORGANIZATION.


Henrico county, the Fredericksburg Free
Lance says:
."rhe HenrIco committee is to be con-
graduated on their firmness and impair
TALLY in the management of this case.
1t is the first one to be investigated under
the pure election laws, and all eyes were
turned to them waiting for the result.
II was feared by many that the violations
of the law, if 1t really was violated,
would be winked at, the result declared
and the guilty parties would receive their
certificate just as though no law mad
been violated. But the hopes OF the law
abiding people were fully met by the
committee the law was upheld and those
who would debauch voters were turned
down. All honor to the committee for
Its noble action.
This article appeared in the Free Lance
before the action of the State Central
Committee was declared The Henrico
committee did right to make this nves-
tigation, and it was a conscientious in
yestlgation. Some of the best and purest
men In the county Of Henrico are on
that committee, and in making their in
quiries and in rendering their decision,
they were actuated by pure motives.
They were convinced that the pure olec-
tions law had been violated by Mr..
Brauer, and they withheld from him
the certificate of nomination. The Times
Dispatch has not undertaken to pass
upon the merits of this case, for we did
not hear the evidence. But knowing
some of the men on the committee. We
know that they did what they believed
to be right.
So far, so good; but the case was after
wards appealed to the State Central
Committee, the highest party authority,
and that committee, after reviewing the
evidences and hearing the argument on
both sides. unanimously decided that the
evidence against Mr.. Brauer was not
sufficient to convict him, and that having
received the highest number Of votes, he
was entitled to tho nomination. 1t Is
understood that even Mr.. Barksdale. the
author of the law, who is naturally very
jealous for its enforcement, agreed with
the committee that Mr. Brauer was en-
titled to the nomination. although for
delicate reasons Mr.. Barksdale rcfraincd
from voting. The committee also put
of the Barksdale law and of Its enforce
ment, and urged Democrats throughout
the whole State to obey the law in spirit
as we'll as In letter.
In Sundays paper We showed concu-
sively that under the party law the State
Central Committee has the right to de-
eide all questions OF contest which may
= md thnrn 1,a
no doubt that the committee was clearly
within its rights in taking jurisdiction OF
this case, in spite OF the fact that the
primary in Henrico county was held
under the statute. We have never said
that the State committee was right in
its decision. We have not undertaken tc
go into the merits of the case But II
Is q perfectly plain proposition that IF
all such matters party law must be
obeyed and the subordinate committees
must yield to the decision OF the supreme
committee, else there can be no stabilt!
of party organization. The State Contra
Committee has no power of law TO en-
force Its DEGREES. 1t is all matter o
voluntary submission, and unless Demo
Gratis are WlllnS 10 SUBMIT, party IaN
will amount TO nothing.
We have not discussed the 1uesto
from partisan standpoint We are dis
cussing principle, and our remark
apply as truly to one party as 10 another
The question at issue is not whether c
not Mr.. Brauer violated the Barksdal
law; the question is whether or not III
county committee, which is subordinate
should abide by the decision OF the Sta,
Committee, which is supreme, In dis
posing of the contest the county commit
tee did its duty as 1t understood It's dut
10 be- But when its action was reverse
by the State Committee the responsible
ity OF MIR. Brauer's candidacy was
longer upon II, but upon the higher con
mittec. The county committee would n
nave compromised itself In any way
acluiescing In the decision of the Sta
committee, any more than the Judge of
county court would compromise himse
by acauescing in reversal from Il
Court OF Appeals. The county committ
was not compelled under the statute
enforce is own decree. The statute w
never Intended TO interfere in any vi
with party organization or party lay
Its only design was to enforce the reg
lations under which the election W
held But by refusing 10 abide by t
decision of the State committee; by den
ing and defying its authority; by decla
ing another candidate TO DO entitled