Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1905-09-15


Now this ended the second Jordan
House bill in the Senate. The mair
thing am trying to get at is this
Judge Mann's. friends claimed that
Judge Mann in voting to recommi,
the bill voted to kill it for two
years. and that it would never come
up again. Judge Mann stated in a
speech at Irvington that he "yoted
with Tidewater Senators against tine
Jordan bill;" said be did it by vot.
ing to recommit; said s'that the,
had a graveyard in the Senate where
they buried bills" said "the Mann
bill had been buried aud he resur.
rected it;" said "that he voted to
put the Jordon bill in the same
graveyard" | wonder if Judge Mann
voted to put his (the Mann bilD in
that graveyard If he did, then, like
Tldewater representatives on the
Jordan bill, he voted 10 favor of the
Mann bill. Let's look into the claim
that recommitting the Jordan bill
killed it for two years. 1t seems
like most everybody is off on that
part of the question. Let's see what
the record shows: Legislature took
recess from December 23rd to goth.
Old Legislature adjourned January
18th, 1904. January 22nd, 1904,
issue of VIRGINIA CITIZEN, second
page, headed Legislative Doings,' -
we find this: "With the organization
of the new Legislature the oyster
light was begun afresh by the intro-
duction of bill by Delegate K. @.
J rrdan, which is lauch more mod
crate la its demands than the first
bill"
Now, remember, this is only one
month since Judge Mann had killed
the bill FOR two years. Ia that time,
thirty days, Jordan had resurrected
his bill from the Senate graveyard,
amended it, and had it before the
House in another dress. Was the
heezell substitute ever resurrected?
No; why not? Because it had been
killed, not recommitted. And had
the Tidewater Senators been allowed
to do what they wished to do when
they voted against recommittal, killed
the Jordan bill, Mr.. Jordan would
have never dared to put another bill
In the next session.
This third Jordan bill came be-
fore House January 26th, 1904. Re-
ported adversely. Reported to House
and Mr.. Jordan asked to have it
recOmmitted TO Committee on Courts
of Justice. Did recommittal kill it
then: The committee reported ia
vorably. Bill No. 3 voted on i'm
House; passed, 56 to 25. Reported
favorably in Senate by committee.
Mr.. Lee and myself were sent to
Richmond to do what we could
against it by the Oysterman's Pro-
tectiye Union. While there Senator
Sears told us that if he could keep
1t from vote until Wednesday they
could talk it to death if they could
not defeat it any other way, and the
bill was practically dead when Sena-
tor Barksdale tried to have it struck
of the calendar, saying: alt is so
dead it stinketh."
This is brief history of the three
Jordan bills. want TO show the
position of Mr.. Lee aud myself, as /
have been accused of being cas- deep
10 the mud as he is In the mire."
Mr. Lee, in particular, has been
criticised very much by Judge
Mann's friends for his editorial of
August 18th. A public mans pub
lie utterances and record are d iblic
property, and every citizen has the
right 70 criticise them. When we
were in Richmond during the last
session of the Legislature, / asked
the,question of one of our Tidewater
Senators: Chow does Judge Mann
stand on the Jordan blIl?" He re-
piled: "He has been against us, but
he and Senator Wick ham are now on
the fence" The record shows the
way they finally fell.) Mr.. Lee and
myself talked it over aud decided
that as the Jordan bill was dead,
and we were having such strenu-
GUS time in Tidewater over the tenn
perance cause, that to tell these
Iidewater people the author of the
Mann bill was against us in oyster
matters would surely injure the tenn
perance fight with as, for our people
were red hot against every one who
turned their hand against them. The
Jordan bill was dead, and could not
hurt us, and the temperance cause,
a live issue, was dear to our hearts.
No one had then thought of Judge
Mann for Governor.
At the beginning of this cam
paign MIR. Lee cautioned me particu.
larly not to inject the oyster ques-
ton into this fight if / could help it,
and it is true that neither Mr.. Lee
nor any other of Mr.. Swanson's
friends said oysters until Judge
Mann's friends tackled me on voting
for the Judge because, they stated,
che has done more for the oystermen
than any man in the Legislature"
and tried to prove it to me by a
letter from Judge Mann in which he
said that he voted with the Tide
water representatives. against the
Jordan bill. |, of course, disputed
1t. Mr.. Lee got copy of the record
from Richmond, showed it to me, saw
lng:"We will not use this unIess forced
to-" Indiscreet friends of Judge
Mann would not let the subject die
out. 1t was reported ten days before
the primary by the Mann people
that II Swanson got the nomination
the oyster rocks were gone. retail
ated by telling them that we had
Judge Mann's record which proved
that he either voted against the
oyster people, or every Tidewater
representative voted against them.
They said: Publish liz" and when