Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1910-10-13
Election Tuesday, November 9Th, 1910.
For CVngTeSS-Einth Congressional District
Q. 3. SLEMP
OF WISE COUNTY.
WHAT IS A PLEDGE?


Mr.. Henry c. Stuart is the worst rat
tied and tangled man we have ever
known to be a candidate in this Con-
gressional district. He has been dodg-
ing and assembling as to his record in
connection with the making of new
constitution until he finds that this
course will not acquit him of the MANY
serious charges of representative inf
deity. He has now begun to denv what
he snd his supporters have before tacit-
ly admitted. In his speech at Saltville
he said:
81 challenge and defy anybody to
show that l ever pledged myself to my
constituents to oppose proclamation of
the constitution. Very likely l had
written some individuals that the con-
stitution would be submitted or should
be, az / thought until the evident DUR
pose Of the Republicans to defeat it
caused me to change my opinion; but
any pledge or assurance on the sub
ject."
This was pretty late in the campaign
for MIR. Stuart to be entering plea of
denial to charge that had been made
by the Republicans through the press
and on the stump for months previous.
And how does he expect to escape the
fact that his newspapers have, general
ly, admitted that he was pledged to
vote for submission, but had been re-
lisved by the adoption of a resolution in
that immense % mass meeting of the
citizens of Russell county.
Now, what is e pledge but promise,
and what is promise but an assurance
given by one to another that a certain
thing shall be done or not done by the
person who makes the pledge?
Mr.. Stuart is known to have been ed
ucated in the law school at the Univer-
sity Of Virginia, and it is to be pre-
sumed that he was taught that promises
may be of two kinds-expressed or i'm
piled, written or unwritten. Accord
ing to Mr.. Stusrt's statement at Salt
vile he il amenable to a charge of hav-
ing made to the people both expressed |
and implied, written and unwritten |
pledges that he would vote for submits
sion Of the constitution and not for
proclamation.
See how careful Mr.. Stuart was when
he stated that very likely he had writ
ten some individuals that the constitu.
ton would be submitted or should be. ."
Why didn't Mr.. Stuart say that he had
written individuals and made to them
such statement, for we are informed
he did, If he did so write to such per-
sons, is it not reasonable to suppose
that he wrote in response to inquiries as
to how he stood on the question? Was
he "hkeIy'' to voluntarily express an
opinion on such a matter, upon which
future differences Of opinion might
arise? Those letters were nothing more
nor less than written pledge to vote
for submission.
And Mr.. Stuart admitted pledge had
been made when he declared it was his I
Intention to vote for submission until q
he evident purpose of the Republicans +
o defeat it (the constitution caused O
i'm to change his opinion" This in c
ention had been made known in some n
ray to his constituents and that was o
Thy, if it really DO so, that "his con- :,
tituents never exacted any pledge or h
ssurence on the subject" >,
Again, Mr.. Stuart was q Democrat
I'd was presumed to be standing on m