Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1910-10-13

| - A-'' patty ouOpteu a.
Norfolk IN 1900. In that platform .
pledge was written that when the new,
constitution was made it should be sub
m'tted to the people for ratification O,
rejection. When Mr.. Stuart became q
candidate. as q Democrat ne ratified and
renewed that pledge and it became for
him personal as we'll rs party pledge.
The late Senator Daniel and number
of the Democratic members of the con-
s'ltutlonsl convention, among them the
Hon Jos. c. Wysor, regarded it SIS u
sacred and binding pledge and refused
to vote fer proclamation. Mr.. Visor
said in the convention:
Under the fscts and circumstances.
either proclamation of the new con-
sltution. or submission thereof to an
abridged electorate, is un-democratic.
un-republican, un-American, breach of
talth or the part of the Democratic
party, which would subject it to the
criticism Of political perfciy, and be an
act of usurpation unparalleled for pre-
sumption in the history Of the Common
wealth"
And Mr.. Stuart became a candidate
for membership in the constitutional
convention under the provisions Of an
act Of the General Assembly approved
February 10th, 1901, which provided
that the new constitution should be sub-
united to the qualified voters for ratifi-
cation or rejection. When Mr.. Stuart
became a candidate FOR membership in
the constitutional convention he ratified
and accepted the provisions of that act
and thereby gave his personal as well
as party pledge that he would vote for
submission Of the constitution and NOT
for proclamation. Well may the people
OF Russell have concluded that if thes.
pledges would not be held binding bv
MIR. Stuart, individual personal pledges
given to each man who voted for him
would have been useless. Then. what
was the use Of the notorious mass meet
ing held at Lebanon on the 9th of Nav
1902, If Mr.. Stuart did not feel in some
way bound to vote for submission? II
Is true that he had previously changed
his mind and determined to vote for
proclamation, because ne discovered
that the Republicans would vote against
the constitution if it was submitted TO
the people. Surely the mass meeting
was purposeless if it was called simply
for the object of endorsing what record
Mr. Stuart had already made. Evil
IDENTIFY it was called for the purpose Of
furnishing him an excuse to vote for
proclamation, as the same plan hsd
been adopted in various other counties
and in some of the cities to furnish 9TH
er Democratic delegates with a pretext
for violating their personal and party
pledges.
On the 10Th of May. 1902, Just three
weeks after Mr. Stuart's Lebanon
meeting, the Hon. Joseph c. Wvsor
made very able speech opposing pro-
cismatlon in the convention. In part
he said:
After the people have expressed
themselves decidedly, unnistakablv.
positively at the polls for submission
you go home, you call a few people
around you, and you reach out and try
to gather up public sentiment to SUD-
port you. You get this sentiment in no
definite way, you get it in no way that
binds you. The people have expressed
their will to US at the polls. They have
done 1t In no unmistakable way. 1T
does not stand you in hand to run home
and gather up little crowd to tell Won
to vote for proclamation, and then come
back and say that the people for sub
mission have no backbone.
Il tell you that the people Of this
commonwealth were led to believe be-
fore they cast their votes that this con-
vention would submit its work to them.
having been led to believe that, and we
having received our commissions under
that state Of affairs, we are bound az
men, to comply with our con-
tract. How are you going to get around |
t? Here is the way. You say Won had
recess, and you went home during the
'ecess, and had little mass meeting
md the mass meeting told you to pro-
lain the constitution; therefore I am
,olng to vote contrary to the will of the
'eople as expressed at the polls; am
'oing to violate my commission; am
'oing to exercise a power never given
o me-"
Mr.. Wysor was then rebuking the