The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-03-04
LEGISLATIVE COMMENT
By LEWIS H. MACHEN.
REVIEW AND PROSPECT

N!'' usleat IN inc senate Saturday of
/ the Jordan bin providing for refer.
! cndun OF the prohibition question 20
| vote OF the peopls of the state
More time, thought. talk and temper
| have been devoted to this single meas
| uric than to any other dozen oils on
| tho calendars. AS repeatedly stated
In these columns, thGro has never been
| II prospect Of It's commanding the
| votes Of majority of the senate. Jus,
| as there was not from the beginning
| the slightest doubt that it would re-
i ccivc an overwhelming vote in the
| House OF Delegate
| Many viii undertake to aualyze the
! votes OF the two bodies in an cmort
/ 10 ascertain why the House should
! have cast n two-thirds vote for the
| measure, while the Senate, elected at
| the same time by the same people.
| should have defeated Il by a vote of
almost equal relative size. The task
VIII be fruit!cbs. After all is aald,
| ,hc me!a fact will continue to apeak
! Tor itself. One thing is certain: the
! majority in the Senate was so deci-
| sive that there is no prospect that a
similar measure win pass the Lcsis
iatura in 1914. Furthermore, IN the
election o. a new senate TO sit In 1916
| tnerc seems at least as much prob
ability that as many wet senators
| viii succeed themselves as iry ones,
! and that the dry Senator'S who do not
return VIII be succeeded by wot onss
as that the vet Senators Will he sue
ceeded ~ dry ones. Political prophecy
is generally mere conjecture. Coadl
| lions may change IN six years aud
! legislative roteH with them, but the
| outlook for prohibition IN Virginia
nov. from the standpoint of the pro-
! hib!tionis;, is exceedingly gloomy.
Friends and foes Of this measure IN
legislative circles breathe a sigh Of
relief that the question has aeen dis
posed OF f.r the present session. at
least and rctoice that IL no longer
| the multitude OF matters which, dur
! Ing the remaining week ot the zcs-
! sion. are pressing for solution.
Tic Byrd Tux Commission DiIl.
After many ups and downs, and
| being bureted in committee and tossed
about on the winds O. debate in the
House, the Eyrd Tax Commission bill
| with u vote of one more than the con-
! stitutlonoi majority. II bears little
! resemblance 70 It's former self. With
| most Of tts teeth drawn and bearing
| on every feature the bruises of its
! antagonists, 1t yet may have some
! v!gor left II. by the grace Of the SEN
! ate. II shall become Law. The SEN
| Elc Would Irpp1o4E act .dNvE4OlS upon
! the measure /: IL had time, but with
| its calendars still crowded the pri-
| mary bill. the redistTlctng bills. and
! dozens OF local measures still 10 be
| disposed OF, there seems little or no
prospect that any such controversial
/ suOjec. as tax reform can be crowded
through However. Speaker Byrd has
performed a notable service In get
ding his bill through the House. albeit
- ai -
tional work which mas been done II!
this connection Will surely bear fruit
in the next General Assembly.
The Primary DHi.
The unfinished business In the SEN
ate is the further consideration OF the
Byrd Featherston primary bill, which
passed the House January 2S After
being nearly e month before the SEN
ate Committee on Privileges and Elcc-
tons. that committee reported It TO
the Senate with series OF amend
ments, which have already been al
ludcd to in these columns and which
reduce tho measure. as il passed the
House. TO Z lame and impotcnt affair,
scarcely worthy OF being saved from,
the scrap-heap The Senate has al
ready adopted the amendments pro-
posed by the committee allowing the
judges Of primaries 10 be appointed oy
tho party committees, who arc also
I TO set the dates on which they are
held Both OF these amendments are
utterly al variance with the policy of
those States that have the benefit OF
an effective primary system.
Tho two amendments or greatest
importance 10 be yet considered are
those the committee recommended,
namely TO allow contests to be heard
by party committees instead of by the
InHn 4 -,
strike out section 6 OF tho bill. Sec
tion i6 declares that no persons. irn'
OF corporation may spend any money
for a candidate except for the pur-
poses for which the candidate himself
may do. and requires Il similar state
ment 10 be Med as that which the
candidate is required 10 make. The
obvious effect of this amendment
(! would be TO allow a person, firm or
corporation to buy nomination for a
candidate under such circumstances as
are not forbidden By existing law, and
to escape the necessity Of giving an
account Of the transaction. II Will be
exceedingly interesting to know wha {;
excuse the committee Will give for
eliminating this most necessary
! feature OF the bill.
/ Ii committees arc to continue 10
hear contests. as they have heretofore
I h"i!c, VIC must expect II continuation
Of such primary election frauds as
have already been "A disgrace To GER
tain parts Of the State and Will dcp:;vc
those who enter such primaries Of an
/ opportunity Ia have their rights de-
tcrmined by court of competent jul
risdiction.' II man is dcfraudcd III
Il horse trade ~ In the purchase OF IL
barrel OF potatoes, lie may have his
grievances adjusted by n court or a
jury: but If IL" suffers like wrong in
heing deprived Of domination to
which he is entitled there is no court
that may restore his rights. This CON
dition is intoierablc, and the Senate
will reflect 40 credit upon itself if
II votes TO continue it.
The Cinmc Dill
'rhe Mcncurc rutherford game bill
lis "a special ordc: in the Senate, fol-
lowing tho disposition of the pri-