The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-31
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 81, 1908.
HENkICO'S MISTAKE.

The campaign slogan for the anti
Home Rule!" They contend that coun-
ty Democrats are amply able to take care
of their own affairs through the County
Committee, and that the State Central
Committee had no business to interfere.
Some indignation has also been expressed
because Senator Barksdale, of Halifax,
a. member of the State Central Commit
tee has come into the county and made
speeches in Mr.. Brauor's behalf.
This is strange ground for any set Of
Democrats to take. 1t Is the business Of
the State Central Committee to interfere
In complica lions such as recently arose In
Henrico county with view to preserving
party harmony. and If the committee had
failed to act it would have been recreant
to its duty and faithless to the party
organization in the State. Surely the COM
mittee had no salfsh interest in this
matter. and 1t would not have interferrcd
II it had not felt in duty bound to do SO,
Tor the members of the committee we'll
knew that 1t was a thankless task, and
that whichever way they decided they
would bring down execraton upon their
devoted heads. The committee has trou-
bles enough without going out OF it's
province to search for them The commit
tee would only have been too glad to dis
miss this case upon the ground that it had
no Jurisdiction, If it could in duty have
done SO. This goes without saying. and
1t is unhecoming in Henrico Democrats
10 accuse the State Committee Of usurpa-
ton, of misch.cvous meddling and above
all Of having been bought up by
Brauer.'
The Democrats OF Henrico cannot cut
themselves loose from the party organi-
zat!on and set UP rule for themselves
in defiance of party law and party dis
cipline. AS part OF the Democratic party
of Virginia the Democratic party of Hen
rico county must conform to the rules, and
they cannot afford to put themselves in
an attitude OF revolt.
This. in our view, is tho main question
and the question OF supreme importance
in this contest. The members Of the State
Committee could not have had any per-
sonal choice as between Brauer and Todd.
They were dealing with u question of
principle and. the question Of personal
preference did not enter into their delibcr-
atoms or their conclusions, They decided
principles OF justice and fairness and
party regularity. and they should not be
condemned for taking Jurisdiction. or for
the manner In which they decided. If the
the subordinate committee must yield tu
the decision OF the supreme committee.
AS for Mr.. Barksdale. 1t Is but fair TO
say that he has done only what was
the State Central Committee, and he is
the author OF the pure elections law
This contest was made on the ground thal
the law had been violated by Mr. Brauer
and as Mr.. Barksdale felt sure that the
charge against hr. Brauer had MT beer
sustained, 1t was er:!nently proper tina
he should upon Invitation go before III,
voters OF Henrico and say so. More thar
that, 1t was his duty as member o. til,
committee 10 go into tho campaign an,
uphold and defend decision of the com
mittee. He has not appeared as tse cham
pion Of Mr.. BraueT per sc, but as thu
champion Of the committee. Had Tod,
been in Rrauers position. he would viii
the same ylgor have advocated the cleo
hon of Todd,