The Washington herald., 1909-01-15
virginia's Poll Tax Again.

The Lynchburg News confesses. with
innocence that is chIdlike and bland,
want Of exact information respecting the
prevalence of poIl-tax bribery in Norfolk.
or. indeed. anywhere in Virginia save
in the wicked Ninth district. where the
Republicans have majority, or possibly
in the Fifth district. where they come
mighty near having one. Elsewhere N
the State. our contemporary affects 70 be-
.Iiere. there is a lack of inducement for
wrongful practices in poll-tax payment
lack Of sufieieney of motives among the
great body OF Virginia Democrats to re-
sort 10 such expedient'' as the prepay
ment OF poll taxes in order 10 secure the
votes of electors unable or unwilling to
pay their own poll taxes. The theory Of
the News is that poIl-tax bribery pre-
walls only in. debatable political territory,
and that slmOn-pure Democratic territory
is free from r.
The trouble with this theory is that It
ignores the political contests of the pri-
mary. in which it is Just as important
that poll taxes be paid as il is in a gen
eral election. VIII our contemporary sol
emnly swear that 10 poll taxes are ever
paid by other than the elector in Demo
cratic primaries? OF course not. Prob
ably there is not contested primary
election from one end Of the State OF
Virginia to the other in which the can
didates. or some Of them, have not paid
the poll taxes Of men whose votes they
were anxious 10 obtain Nothing else
could be expected. for in every political
contest victory depends on getting the
most votes. The poll tax is an obstacle
TO getting out the vote. and one Of the
easiest and surest ways OF overcoming II
is by using campaign funds TO qualify the
voters. Money is so used TO procure reg
istration, 70 haul voters 20 the polls. and
the ike. and It is so used wherever a
poll tax is required as a suffrage quail
fcation- That the poll tax is subject 10
this abuse is acknowledged in the vir-
ginia constitution, which requires the per
sonaI payment OF the tax. an abortive
provision intended TO prevent the pay
ment Of the tax by anybody but the
voter and so eliminate the possibility Of
bribery. II is an ineffective provision. as
We say. because evasion Is possible in
several ways. all Of which are vel known
to Virginia politicians.
As to conditions in Norfolk. they are a
matter Of judicial record Has the News
so soon forgotten the action begun in
that town and now pending in the State
Supreme Court wherein the lower court
decided that personal payment OF ths
pol tax meant actual payment BY the
voter IN person. and not payment through
a second party? In that case the methods
employed by machine politics in Norfolk
were clearly exposed. the action having
been brought 70 break down the evils Of
pOll-tax bribery But it is already evi-
dent that no judicial construction Of the
p0ll-tax provision. however strict. viii
avail to prevent the payment OF poll
taxes by interests aiming At control OT
the electorate. for these interests can
bring their retainers 10 the county treas
urer's Office in person. there provide them
with money and see that they make
bodily payment Of the tax. We are in
formed that this was done within the last
few weeks in the city OF Norfolk It is
direct and open bribery, and nothing else.
and it IS accomplished IN strict com
piiance with the poll-tax clause of the
Virginia constitution. What are the good
citizens OF Virginia going 10 do about it,
Congress laughed heartily while the
Presidents message was being read.
''The President laughed heartily at the
attempted Congressional rebuke." Why
doesn't the public laugh?