Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1908-01-30
MR. aoRpoN,s spEEoH.


half of his candidacy for the congress-
ionsl nomination, and talked for some
thing over an hour and three-quartets.
After paying a nice tribute to the county
OF Fairfax and to our late fellow citiE1n,
George Washington, be complaiued Of
the fact that the press of the district
had, with great unsnimity, criticised his
course in renewing the contest while his
competitor, Mr.. Uarlin, was 10 Wash
iugton attending TO his duties as our
Congressman. A very considerable por.
ton of his speech ives devoted TO au
article that had appeared in the Msnss-
sas Journal, and to its editor, Mr..
Moran, as well as to the Exponent and
its editor, Mr. Raleigh. 7. Green.
While his criticism we're, at times, some
what severe, they did not transcend the
bounds of courtesy or propriety, but q
person, unfamiliar with the facts, enter
ing the courtroom just at that moment,
would have concluded that be was run
ming against Mr.. Moran or SIR. Green,
rather than against Mr.. Carlin.
Mr.. Gordon said he had invited Mr..
Carlin to meet him in debate at his
previous appointments, but that gentle
man had replied that bis duty was In
Congress now to look after the interests
OF the district-or words to that effect.
Mr.. Gordon said it was we'll known
fact that new congressman had very lit
tie to do, were placed on unimportsnt
committees, aud would have no trouble
in the world 10 getting leave Of absence
to canvass their districts when they had
opposition. This is very true, but no
one can doubt that if Mr.. Oarlin had re-
turred to tbs district TO meet Mr.. Cor
don so soon sfter being sworn in as q
member, the latter would have been ur-
sparing 10 bis criticism of member who
would thus "ntglect his duty" as a rep
reseutativc to look after his personal in
terests. Besides, if new member is Of
SO little consequence, why should Mr..
Gordon ssk the people OF the Eighth
district 10 turn down man who had
acquired even limited experience aud
put 10 his place man who had no ex-
perience Whatever he said he had no
cri:icism to make of Mr.. Oarlip, and his
auditors could but wonder why, in that
event, he should wish to supplsnt him.
He repudisted the suggestion that
there bad been any collision between
himself and Mr.. Ryan 10 connection
with the latter's Withdrawal from the
race on the eve of the primary last fall,
and said that the vote received By him
self and Judge Nicol represented the
snti.Oarlin vote and constituted ma
jsrity of the votes cast at that election.
This is not q fair inference, because the
vote at the home of each candidate
showed that local considerations entered
very largely into the matter. IL is un-
denisble that hundreds (perhsps thou
sanjs) who voted for Judge NIcol will
now vote for Mr.. Carlin 10 preference to
Mr.. Gordon. and, if our Information is
correct, many who voted for Mr.. Cord n
on that occasion will not support Mr..
Carlin.
So far as we could judge from what
he said, Mr.. Gordon presented but one
reason ghy, in his opinion, the people
should suppos. dim 10 preference to bis
competitor, aud that was because he was
an snti.corpOration man. he fail
ed to show, however, Id what respect
Mr.. Carlin was a pro-corporstion man.
Mr.. Gordon may be an sDti-corporation
man in some respects, but his record shows
that hs was once part of q very close
corporation, which took from the peo-
pie of Virginia something of more value
than dollars and cents, viz: the highest
privilege of citizenship. The people of
Virginia voted fol constitutional con-
veution upon the solemn assurance that
its work should be Submitted to them for
or rejection. Mr.. Gordon,
who was member of that convention,
united Wi;h certain otber members (con-
majority Of that body who
srogated to themselves the right TO
proclaim the Constitution, without Civ
ing the people the promised right to
vote upon the question Of the adoption
or rejection of the organic law under
which they we're to live. How was that
for monopoly" or a "combinea" II
was in utter dtflnce Of the doctrine tina!
this is government Of the people, by
the people, aud for the people," and
made 1t government by majority of
the Constitutional Convention, includ-
ing Mr.. Gordon.
Mr.. Gordon said that lawyers who
we're so often called upon to defend rail-
roads in cases where some old farmer
would salt the track TO get worthless
,slf to stand thereon and DO run over
and killed by the train ard then enter
'uit for damages for the killing of q
FLOODED animsl," or one who bad
lew leaves aud some sagsbrush burned
BY sparks from passing locomotive and
hen entered suit for the destruction Of
valuable timber, soon bad their minds
rslned IN sueh channel that tney
,ould not discriminate between real and
imaginary grievances against the rail-
Dads. A person would suppose from
bis remark that 1t was q common oc.
iurrence among farmers 70 do this way
80 much SO that vast number Of cor
,oration lawyers had their minds blind.
d to the true interests Of the people. Il,
lie ssid that wherever be went the peo-
lie, "taugat BY the politicians, "met him
nth the argument that his competitor,
rho had just been elected, should have
nance 10 show whs. be could DO. Mr.. /.
iordon's ambition has go obscured his
alignment that he Eesms unable To recog,
ize the capacity Df the people to ar
i've at fair aud just conclusion. he
n dnluod I'm onnah oFitfciena If Nnoiifi.