Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1906-10-11
THE OBJECTIONABLE INTRUSION
AGAIN.


ginia Intrusion, published an editorial
that was bitterly critical of the Ninth
District Republicans; and on the goth
of September we published an editorial,
responsive thereto, under the head,
''The Objectionable Intrusion. On
the 4th inst. our Richmond contempt
rary published another editorial about
Eastern Virginia Intrusion, in which
it undertakes very artfully to misinter-
pref and waive aside the unanswerable
points we made as to the intrusion from
Eastern Virginia that was Objectionable
to the people of the Ninth District. The
News Leader says:
cit is encouraging to observe that
the Tazewell Republican is ashamed of
some of the communications and articles
from its political associates which have
been printed in the Ninth District in the
course of the congressional campaign
now in progress there"
Thus does our contemporary shrewdly
try to put aside its own shame for the
publication of the article which we so
justly criticised in our issue of the goth
of September. And we want to say
right here that we know of no articles
published by our political associates on
the subject under discussion of. which
we are ashamed.
The News Leader, to show that this
paper is making unjust criticisms upon
the Eastern Virginia Intrusion, quot
ed as follows from our editorial of the
10Th ult.:
''The application of these methods has
produced manifestly unjust and dis
honest legislative apportionment of the
State, whereby one white man IN
many of the counties of Eastern Vir-
ginia is made equal to five white men in
the great counties of Tazewell and
Buchanan and other great counties of
the Southwest. Will the News Leader
undertake to defend this iniquity and
assert that the pee ole of the Southwest
have no right to complaint
Our Richmond contemporary Gid I'M
dertake in its editorial of the 4th inst. to
defend the outrage, and with the follow
ing remarkably inaccurate statement:
"And yet this apportionment, of which
the Republican complains, is made pre-
cisely on the same principle as the ap-
portionment for Congress by the United
States government principle of
dividing the population by the whole
number of representatives andgiving as
near as possible equal representation
according to numbers"
We are forced to believe that if the
News Leader had investigated it would
never have made such an untrue and in
accurate statement as the above. The
last legislative reapportionment is not
made at all upon the principle used for
congressional apportionment, and every
body knows that even the congressional
apportionment is unfair and partisan.
Let us see if this is not so.
Appomattox county (Hal Floods rot
ten borough) had at last census $500
5,7S1 white population and 8, 9S1 colored,
a total Of 1862.
Tazewell and Buchanan counties had
by the same census 2s,489 whites and
1857 negroes. Buchanan alone had
1857 white persons, or 25 more white
population than the combined white and
colored population of Appomattox.
By the Democratic legislative reap
portionment bill Appomattox is given
one member of the House of Delegates,
and the great counties of Tazewell and
Buchanan are united and given one del
egate. This was an outrage on Buch-
anan county, which has more white pop
ulation than the combined white and
colored population of Appomattox.
Another illustration: Halifax county
by the last census had 1892 white and
9,275 colored population. That county
is given two members in the House of
Delegates and one State Senator.
The counties of Buchanan, Dicken-
son, Russell and Tazewell by the same
census had 1903 white and 4,S51 col
ored population, total population Of
5S,S54. These four great counties are
given one Senator and two and a half |