Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1905-10-19

can surely find no match on earth, ana
hardly one in hades.
ANOTHER OUTRAGE CONTEMPLATED.
One of the strongest reasons urged
by the Virginia Democracy for making
a New Constitution was to reduce the
expenses of the State Government.
They said there were twice as many of
ficers in the State as were needed. In
stead of reducing the number of officers
they have been Increased, and the total
cost of administering the State Govern
ment in 1904, under the New Constitu-
ton was about three-quarters of a mill
ion dollars ($75O, OOO) more than it was
in 1901 under the old Constitution. The
criminal expenses of the State for 1908
O4 under the New Constitution were
several thousand dollars more than they
were for the years 10000 under the
old Constitution. Sc much for the
claims CT the Democrats that they were
going to reduce the expenses of the
State Government.
We now warn the people that it is the
purpose of the Democratic party to COM
nit another outrage and levy another
burden en- them, and that is the cost of
holding the Democratic primaries. This
is to be done at the next session of the
General Assembly, if the Democrats
have large enough majority in that
body and elect Governor who will ap-
prove legislation directed to that end.
Great complaints have been made about
the heavy expenses that had to be in
Cured by the candidates who went be-
fore the recent Democratic primary.
And it has been suggested, and the sug-
gestion is now taking shape, that pri-
maries be legalized by an Act of the
General Assembly and that the expenses
of holding them be paid out of the treas
ury of the State. Some of the leading
Democratic papers have endorsed this
scheme, among them the Richmond
Times Dispatch, the Norfolk Landmark,
the Roanoke Times and the Bristol
Herald. 1t has also been published that
Senator Thomas, who represents the
city of Lynchburg and county of Camp
bell, in the State Senate, has a bill al
ready prepared on the lines above indi-
Gated, and which he will introduce in
the Senate at the next session of the
General Assembly.
AS we understand it the bill will pro-
vide that any party in the State which
has as many as ten thousand voters can,
if it so desires, hold primary election
to nominate it's State officers and that
the counties and cities of the State
shall pay the expenses of such primary
or that the same shall be paid out of the
revenues of the State. If the expense
is placed upon the cities and counties
this will add largely to the tax burdens
of the people, and if they are paid out
of the State treasury it will be an ex-
pense that ought not to be incurred,
when it is claimed that the State is too
poor to furnish free books to the pupils
of the public schools.
Of course the cost of legalized pri-
mary will be as great as the cost OF
holding a regular election. Suppose
both the Democrats and the Republi-
cans should decide to hold primaries
each year there are general elections,
the people would then have to pay the
expenses for holding three elections in
stead of one. And is there any justice
in saying, if there should be a legalized
primary, that only parties that poll ten
thousand or more voters shall be author
lied to hold primary elections. All re-
form movements in the political field
have small beginnings, such as the Pro-
hibition party. Now why should these
reform parties or movements be ex-
Guided from the benefits of the legalized
primary? This suggestion is only made
incidentally. The chief point we wish
to make is that it will be an outrage to
make the people pay for primary cleo
tons for the benefit of candidates who
are too poor or stingy to pay the ex-