The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-03-06
Merely Deferred.

The Senate of Virginia has seen fit to kill the
"enahline bill notwithstanding that the House
which is closer to the people, passed 1t by a
ma iority Of two to Those Senators who
voted against the bill must answer to their own
conscience and their constituency 70, their
vote Some OF them. as Senator Holt, Of New
port News. practically instructed by thelr
supporters to vote against the measure. The
question was made distinct issue in. Newport
News and throughout the district and Senator
Holt by large majority over his worthy
opponent. True. other issues were involved ana
the vote for Senator, as well as the vote for
delegate in Newport News. was not a fair test
OF public sentiment on the prohibition ques-
ton. We have doubt that many who would
vote dry in local option election, II not IN
Statewide election, supported Holt and Mil
stead for other reasons, But that does rot
alter the fact that the enabling act bin "as
Clear cut issue, and That THOSE caHddates WHO
had declared themselves opposed to II We're
rtrouSr7 pvcr cart,t:t.a ties ~ifss had declared
themselves IN it's favor
But waving this phase of the question, we
think that the Senate made bunder in defeat
ing the Jordan bin. There was abundant evil
dence to show that large majority of the ieo-
pie favored It. indicated by petition ana
especially by the vote in the House. and the
vote in the~Senate Saturday will be construed by
the advocates of the Jordan bin as vote in
defiance OF the popular VIII.
That means that the end Is not vet The
issue will not down. 1t will now become dis
tnctvely q political Issue, We fear, and will
prove to be Il menace to the Democrats
PARTY.
This question IS not settled and those who
latter themselves that the 'agltatoh mas heel
Choked to death by the Senate are reckon
iTg without the "host' of prohbitionists. The
agitation will go right and viii shake the
legislature of 1914 as 1t shook the Legislature
of 1910 and 1919. We have taken the grourd
that it was best for all interests to face the
issue to let the people vote X and settle 1t
ore way or the other. We not at all
sure that statewide prohibition would carry in
Virginia. The question to be submitted under
the Jordan bill not wet or dry for the
whole State, but whether local option State
wide prohibition should prevail. There many
voters in the State who would vote for prohihi-
ton IN q local option contest. but would not
vote for a prohibition measure that would de-
stroy local option
u Sc a far-reac aching question. Democrats are
welded to the principle Of local self-government
and many Of them would refuse to vote with
anv movement which overrode the local option
principle and the well established policy of the
Democratic party. II is opinion that
large majority Of the Democratic voters Of the
State are of that mind and would act ac-
cordingly.
1t is by no means certain therefore. that
Statewide prohibition would carry in popular
election in Virginia. We quite sure 1t
would not carry In strictly Democratic pri-
many.
But the Senate has twice refused to allow
the question to be submitted and in doing so
has rallied the prohibitionists, and strengthened
tter cause. The fight will continue and it is
probable that the next Legislature will be tdlioi
upon TO vote directly Statewide prohibit
ton hi11-NewpOrt News Times Herald