Clarke courier. [volume] (Berryville, Va.) 1869-1997, 1910-03-02
For Separate Precinct

separate election precinct has
passed the House OF Delegates, and
will now 90 to the State Senate.
The sole object of this bill is to
place the corporation of Berryville
In a separate precinct, and to sepa-
rate 1t from both Battletown and
LOngmarsh districts, in which it
now lies.
Heretofore, when an election
was held in which citizens of the
town-and those Only-were di-
rectly interested, and the District
was NOT interested to any extent.
only those who happened 10 live
in Battletown district have been
allowed to vote, because it was
DISTRICT election.
1t Is not fair, it is not just. it is
not honest. that citizens Of Berry
who pay their taxes as promptly
as any others, should be deprived
of a vote merely because they
happen to live in the edge of Long
marsh district.
And the bill Is aimed to correct
that wrong.
Any move TO have the Battletown
district line extended to take in
that part of Longmarsh which lies
in the Corporation. will be bitterly
opposed 10y Longmarsh. Any
move to extend the Longmarsh
hue 10 take in that part OF Battle
town district which lies in the
Corporation will be met with siren
uous opposition from Battletown.
Neither district want. 10 give up
to the other.
Aud yet neither district is max
ing opposition to the proposed law.
The only opposition comes from a
few-and "a very fcw-who advance
the speciouS argument, we are told,
that the proposed law has for its
purpose the obtaining Of another
local option election for this Town.
We taks this method Of brand
ing such a statement as absolutely
and unqualiledly untrue.
We are informed that at least
one prominent Anti-Saloon League
worker Is in Richmond opposing
this bill. VIII somebody tell Us
why. lie pays no taxes here:
this i local measure; it is not
aimed at the Anti-Saloon League:
SO why should the organization
oppose ii. Is it because they have
an opposition TO anything which
our Delegate introduces.
We would like for someone in
authority in the League to inform
Us about this question.
We are also informed that q
letter was sent from this Town to
Delegate jennings (not 10 our own
Delegate, Mr.. Grigsby). setting
forth the argument which we have
mentioned above. Why, if the
letter was to be sent. was il not
sent 10 our own Delegate, instead
of TO one from another district
Haven't you sufficient faith in your
own opposition TO place il in the
, hands of the man who should have
received ii.
We are also reliably informed
, that. after fne-tooth combing thi,
entire Town. the opposition must
cred about 80 signerS TO petition
against the measure, ont Of tota
5 population of nearly NINE HUN
DRIED.
Does that show the popularir!
. of the opposition!
We repeat, the sole object of tn
bill Is 10 cut this town loose from
each of the MagiSterial districts il
, which ii now lies; the COURIER
opposed to another local OPTIC
election here untilthe time allowe
/ by the law has expired and thi
: writer Is personally opposed to il
, and we believe every man who
/ now forced 10 go To RuSSell's pre-
cinct te vote, and who will be affect
eel by the new law. IS opposed to il
t and any man who says that tn
object of the bill Is TO Secur
another local option election in thi
Town states an untruth-cithe
= from ignorance of the facts, @
4, from some other reason.
o {. Il. III.