The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1911-10-19

repeated IN varying forms ever since
the Norfolk convention, and repeated
sometimes In such shape az to indi-
cate that the parties repeating the
charges utterly ignored all the condi-
tons which confronted the Norfolk
convention and which actually deter
mined the course pursued. For ex-
ample. one paper. referring to the ac-
ton OF the League. says: I'VE thought
| then. as we do now, that if the Ques-
iioG had been submitted to the vote
OF the people. II would have been car
ried by large majority thus viz
tually intimating that all the conven-
ton had to do was to declare In favor
of Statewide prohibition, and the ques-
ton would be Immediately submitted
to the vote Of the people; whereas
there was never any possibility OF the
question being submitted to the vote
of the people without the consent of
the Senate OF Virginia. from the time
the Norfolk convention met down TO
the present hour. and, there cannot
be any submission of the question to
| the vote OF the people at any time un-
| less the General Assembly, shall pass
bin providing that such vote be
taken. Similarly, the Roanoke World
declares. Three years ago, at the Nor
folk convention. the League had an
/ opportunity to sweep Virginia with
Statewide principles and to Danish IL
censed saloons from the Atlantic to
Bristol" This sounds very well. but It
Is directly opposed by the facts, as
they really existed at that time
When the Anti Saloon League Con-
vention met in Norfolk in 1909. the
general conditions In temperance
work were as follows With the active
cooperation Of the League, the Mann
law had been passed and had wrought
a revolution in the conditions in rural
Virginia. This had been followed by
the passage OF the Byrd Mann law
by the General Assembly of 1908.
Both Of these laws had been passed
in the face OF the opposition of the
wet" newspapers, especially OF the
city OF Richmond. The Byrd Mann
law had been passed by the House
in few hours. with very little OPP
position, but in the Senate a bitter
fight was waged against II extending
over several days. and 1t was very
evident to the League workers that
no advanced legislation could be OBJ
talned from that Senate except by
bringing to bear upon 1t the most tre-
mendous pressure in the shape of pc
titions. and personal appeals BY lead
ing men and women to the senators
from their various districts. The
convention met with the knowledge
on the part of the leaders. obtained by
practical experience. that the Senate
of 1908. all the members OF which
would hold over tn the session OF 1910,
offered small hope of passing bill
giving the people the right To vote on
the question of Statewide prohibition,
This was fact number one.
Second. The months just preceding
the meeting of the convention mad
witnessed a number OF triuTnphs Tor
the League workers in local option
elections, and there was a very strong
sentiment on the part of many OF
| the very best temperance workers
throughout the State that there should
he no change for the present in the
policy that had brought such great
success 10 the cause. Very many
persons OF standing and influence in
various parts Of the State had worked
| with the League. and were wiling to
continue TO work with IL on the local
option basis who had positively de
/ ciared themselves as opposed TO the
Statewide policy, and had declared
themselves unwilling TO support such
a policy, should it he adopted The
newspapers of the State. with few
exceptions had opposed the state
wide policy on the ground that II
would disrupt the Democratic party
| because IL was contrary to Demo
cratic principles, etc, Letters came
tro the officials Of the League from
every part Of the state urging th'
maintenance OF the local option
/ policy. and Rev. James Cannon. the
chairman of the legisla tive committee
/ received great number, One Is
/ given here in full. because or the
nrorr,inence OF the writer and because
OF the fact that he openly favored tht
nomination of Hon. III. 81. George
Tucker and cannot. therefore. pos
sihly be accused by the Evening jour
nal OF belonging tor the little sfool
THAT sliDordinaIed the Leagues WORK
Ia aid the candidacy of Judge Mann
He had talked with Rex. James Ian
non several days before the conNeh'
ticn. and had expressed his aplhioi
freely at thai time as faNofshs the
continuance OF the local option pei''s
for the present, but +" ANXIOUS "a'
Ne that IN. League should make nc
mistake that on the VerE aas on "''
ina convention met he wrote the ioi'
lowing letter; ,aoa
Rev James Cannon, Jr.,
Norfolk. Va.
Nv dear Doctor Cannon. 1.-THE pa
pers are printing here good aeA1
about the Probability OF the auopuon
hy the convention of some hedsui
hacking to Statewide prohieiuoh- Va
: course If that issue is ralseu' you
very we'll know where / may De IKE
/ Nv ro b,, found At the same Tune
feel entirely confident that the pres
emf is not the opportune moment fof
making this issue. My own opinions
an the matter, however, are not sPe-
! ciallv important, but great. many
| SINCERE friends of The Anu-Saloon
| League have expressed already To me
a similar Judgment. Indeed this sen
/ tirnent seems to be very nearly unahA.
nous among the people with whom
come in touch, and cannot nut Tear
that in this state of things TIE pre-
cipitation OF contest OF this kinc
woula almost certainly result In q
| serious division of our forces. ano
might set back for considerable
/ time our work.
! As have said repeatedly in pun
! lie and in private, the management
of our Anti-Saloon work in Virginia
has been in every way admirable, ano
/ sincerely believe that persistent
I ana vigorous pressing az the poiicfes
already adopted will result in a more
p.rmuncnt and enduring benefit thar
| the more sweeping measures OF ouI
southern States. / have felt that
YOU would not be unwilling to hear