Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1909-01-28
0RE60N'S EXPERIMENT.


States Senate. In thus acting it pro-
;eeded to perform an A. B. C. obliga-
ion OF honest conduct. To what extent
Is action should be received with COM
Dcndation, may well be determined by
skiing how far man should be praised
or refusing to commit deed involving
,ress talsehood and odious treacherv?
The people of Oregon named Chamber
ain as their choice for the United States
senate. A large number Of the sue
;essful Republican nominees for the
legislature had pledged themselves to
7ote for the candidate named by the
people. They have redeemed that pledge
that is all. To the discredit of the
Republican party in Oregon, tremen-
dous Republican effort was brought to
bear upon pledged legislators to induce
hem to violate their sacred obligation.
To the discredit of Mr.. Taft, it happen
ed that when he was asked as to his
conception of such effort, he declared
he would voice no SAY" in the matter
one way or the other.-LynchburH
News.
1t ia supremacy ridiculous for the
Lynchburg News, n bitter exponent Of
Virginia Democracy, owned and guided
in its editorial expressions by Carter
Glass, to be morAlizing about political
taith or party pledges.
The Republicans out in Oregon did an
1nwise thing when they consented to
1ullify the provisions of the Federal
Constitution in the manner Of selecting
United States Senators. AS long as
he supreme law of the land provides
way for the election Of Senators that
aw should be strictly complied with.
When the Constitution has been chan
sed so as to have thepeople elect Sena-
1ors by direct vote, then will be time
enough to try the doubtful experiment.
However. the Republicans OF Oregon
we're caught in a trap they helped to
set; and they have followed the only
honorable course left them, and elected
Democrat to the United States Sen
ate.
Suppose such situation had existed
n Virginia, with the Democrats in over
whelming control of the legislature. and
pledge at the election having been
made to elect to the Senate q man to
whom the people should give major
ty. And suppose the people had given
4 majority for Republican, would the
Virginia Democrats have kept their
pledge? Would Mr.. Glass have kept it?
In very recent years we have had an
excellent opportunity to learn how the
Virginia Democrats keep the faith and
stand by their solemn pledges. We re-
fer to the making of q new Constitu-
cion for the State. The Democrats held
State convention at Norfolk in March,
1900. The question of making q consti-
luton was agitAted in that convention,
and in the platform adopted was writ
zen & resolution pledging the people that
f they would consent to the making of
new constitution that it should be sub
nitted to them for ratification or rejec-
zion. We recall the fact that Mr.. Carter
Class was the author of that resolution;
Snd we also remember that q few days
after the pledge was given in the Demo-
cratic platform that Mr.. Glass asserted
in his paper that the resolution was in
tended to be positive pledge to submit
the new Constitution to the popular vote
for ratification or rejection.
Afterwards, when the question Of
holding Constitutional Convention was
submitted to the people the same assur-
snces were given everywhere by the
Democrats that the Constitution would
be submitted. When the convention
wRs ordered and it became necessary
FOR the, General Assembly to pass an
Act providing for election of members
Of the Constitutional Convention, in that
Act wss Incorporated a positive mandate
for submitting the Constitution to the
people. Mr.. Glass, however, was at
shat time a member Of the State Sen
tie; and, strange to say, he did every
hing he could to prevent the writing in
he Act of the clause requiring submis-
,ion- Bnt, here were two distinct
pledges made by the Democratic party
o submit the Constitution to the people.
Of course the people thought is unnec-