The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-02-21
EDITORIAL
Democracy or Notification.

Ss The Times Dispatch still endeayors to pose as
II Democratic paper, but continually repudiates Den
ocratic principles, and stands for notification.
delivered itself of thousand or so words in il
opposition 10 the Strobe Bill on Saturday, and o
Sunday it wrote another editorial which denied I'll
rights OF the people in one breath and declare
s itself tn be Democratic in the next breath. Hea
its oraruiar utterances:
.sIn other words the general merits OF particula
question have something to do with the granting c
a so-called referendum upon it, in violation OF on
established method of making laws Mems view
of the merits and underlying principles OF prohb
ton by the State law should influence and do in
fuence their attitude toward granting the peopl
the opportunity to make such law
Here we have the true position of the 'Suprem
i'm Virginia, :" The question 10 whether tn
people OF Virginia shall be given the right to vot
on any matter is to be determined by the persona
views OF the members OF the General Assembly upol
that matter II member OF the General Assembl,
does not personally favor believe in State wild
prohibition he should not vote to allow the peopl
10 vote that question. And this is put FORWARD
hy the Supreme in Virginia as Democratic doc
trine, The people are not the ones to decide TIL
question. The personal views Of the Legislature ar
10 decide.
The Times Dispatch docs not believe in Stat
Wide Prohibition. therefore, the people should no
be given the right to vote upon that question: IT
the Times Dispatch believed in State Wide Pro
hibstion il would insist that the people be allowed
1t.
people have right to decide the liquor problem a
TO them shall seem best is violently repudiated b,
the Times Dispatch because ii fears that the peop
would vote for State Wide Prohibition. and thi
would hinder the right OF every to drink liquo
to his comfort and this right is importan
than the Democratic principles of the right of th
people OF Virginia to settle the question the,
think best
tn the next paragraph the Times Dispatch de
Clares that it is in favor of the Democratic principle
OF Local Option and opposed to the antagonist
and contradictory principle OF State Wide Prohibi
: ton however exercised.
This statement when reduced to its final analyst
means that a few OF the towns and cities have
right TO nnlGfy the will OF the rest OF the State b,
Becoming distribution Centers for the liquor traf
for the rest OF the State. If the Times Dispatch
so jealous for Local Option why has it not dom
something to help the dry" territory Why doe
the Times Dispatch oppose every measure that ha
for its object the protection of the dry territory
from the wet" Towns and cities--TAe TiHes-Dis
patch knows that Local Option policy to-day
notification policy, and that its claims for tn
right OF one fourth of the State to drink liquor t.
its comfort is an nsistence that the said one fourt
shall ship liquor to the three-fourths greatly tn
discomfort Of the three fourths. II the Times
Dispatch really had any concern about Local OPP
tion a. "a Democratic principle ii would be con
Ccrned about the notification OF the will of tn
people in three fourths-of the State by the people
OF one fourth OF the State and il would urge til
passage OF the Restricted License Bill or tn
Restricted Shipping Bill both OF which arc befor
n the General Assembly ard neither Of which hav
been honored By the support OF the Supreme"
Ihc Iine==D Dispatch i$-sel4- convicted -bein
uudemocratiC in declaring that the people shout
not be allowed vote the question of a Stat
Wide Law 1t is persistently championing null
fication under the guse OF fighting for local option
And when the mask is laid aside it stands wher
U il has always stood, opponent Of all pre-
q * an q al he oh {
man to drink liquor to his comfort no matte
what discomfort may come upon society by tn
exercise of that right by individuals.
The Times Dispatch is endeavoring to make til
Democratic party stand for the saloon. Its polio
If followed by the General Assembly will put til
Democratic party in the attitude OF refusing
allow the people OF Virginia this question
There thousands of Democrats in Virginia VIII
are unwilling for the party to take away sue
responsibility or to stand in any way as the all
OF the liquor interests. They do not insist tina
4 the Democratic party shall take the responsible
for the passage OF State Wide law. But the
did insist positively that the Democratic party sha
not become the tool OF the liquor interests, an
prevent the people themselves from passing a Stat
Wide Law.
About week ago, Hon. William Jenning
Bryan. declared IN statement TO the press:
The Democratic party cannot afford to act
as the rnouthpiece of the liquor interests. 1t
can have nothing in common with the selfish.
merccnary and conscenceless crusade that the
liquor interests have organized against the
home and the State-against private virtue and
public morals
The Times-Dispatch will prababy boot at thi
coming from Mr.. Bryan. But il is sound to tn
core. The Democratic party cannot allow itself t
be under suspicion controlled by the liquo
interests in Virginia
Give the people the right, and let them vote
is the sound advice that The Nirginian gives t,
the party leaders
Bank Inspection.
Unless influential friends OF the measure get be
4 hind nd give pt,Sh fhe-e will ba Iay,e T.,