Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1910-03-25
Thinks There Was Widespread
Demand.

Editor Daily Press: |, a regular read
er of the Press, beg little space lor
comment and questions. In your aDie
leader in the issue of March IL, re
viewing the work of the late session
of the general assembly, you devote
the greater part of the editorial to
a defense of Messrs. Holt. Stearnes
and others Of the assembly who OPP
DCsed and defeated the StrOde-MyerS
Enabling Act.
This pill YOU say "oyershadowed
all others in the matter o. general
interest" This bill | understand was
favored ii not fathered by the Anti
saloon League. The chiefs and lead
ers of the league appeared before
the committees of the assembly IN
its favor and eXerted themselves y
persuade the members CT bCtn houses
TO vote for its passage. They pre-
scented 10 the assembly petitions
signed by thirty-fiye thousand, more
than Cne-thild OF the vote OF the
state. urging the passage OF the Eii
I'm addition 10 this many voters
wrote to, or telegraphed to assembly
men asking them u support this bill
When we lCCk at the list or OF
fcers and directors Cf the league and
consider their position ana IN
fiuence in the state as educators,
preachers. publicists. statesmen, etc,
who. il must be conceded are powers
in the state" and see that these men
were backed NJ by thirty-five thous-
ard others. whose names were Solicit
ed and secured by men Of SUCH stand
ing as Rev. +. r. Wexford and the
enc or TWO ether ministers who
assisted him in getting signatures In
NewpCrt News, ana add an uncounted
number of voters who wrote o.. sent
telesrams. il is amazing tina. this Dill
was not passed. The history OF leg
islation in Va. has never before
shown So many people asking fer the
passage Of a particular DILL
But i'm the face OF all these petition
crs asking for the passage OF the
StrCde-Myers bill. the editor pub
fishes to the world as the natural
conclusion. THAT there was no Wide
spread popular demand for the enab-
ling act
To break the force CT the thirty
FIVE thousand petitioners and get a.
this conclusion. the editor tells US
that men like Mr.. Wexford could Sc
cure signatures to a petition asking
fer unreasonable thIngS-fCr almost
ANYTHING. But the reader and the
editor know that Mr.. Wexford ana
men like him would not secure sigma
lures to any petition unfairly CT by
deception. The character OF Mr.
Wexford and men like him give ad-
ditional force to the names they Sc
cure to any petition. The editor
reasons well but the facts given are
dead against the conclusion.
The facts:-MOre than thirty
thousand including many Ct the most
prominent citizens Of the State were
asking for this legislation. How many
on the other side and who? Were
there mere citizens petitiOning the
, legislature not to pass the Strobe
Myers Enabling Act than were peti-
tioRing fer its passage? Were these
petitioners led by better men than
apreared for the biil2 Were the
creanizati,us opposing the bill more
ratriogic than the Anti-saioon
Lacquer " so. then the assembly
men who opposed the bill are not
-betrayers Il their constituents
But ,gbe thirty-fve thousand will be
heard in the next election.
Mr.. Editor. give the strength and
ccmpos:tion OF this m-re formidable
lobby" that drowned the voice OF the
AnfisaioOn League ard its cohorts
and convinced the Legislature that
this lobby not the league and The
shirty-fve Thousand. expressed the
POPULAR DEMAND. W. =. W