The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-02-18
Voice Of the eople
NIr. Mnrrinon Rcnlicn.

10 the Editor OF The Tim eg- Dispntch.
slf,-Aly attention mas been called Ia
your recent editorials OH the dues.
non ION o. resubmittinE the constitutional
ana commissioners OF the revenue
regret that you could not state your
views on this question without arn tuit
ouSiE bringing my name before the
p l,',,.i IN connection with your un-
speFtns abuse of those VINO could not
accept your dictum on a question of
constitutional construction. You ar
roneously state what you are nInascd
70 cal my contention" and assert
!hht even a cornilcld lawyer knows
that rcsubmission this year is un
cVhStltutiond!. and YOU denounre those
VINO should vote for rcsubmissiOn as
"llhd 10 their oHthS to Supuoit m.
constitution and presenting thu sorry
spectacle of voting for bill which
o crIy Know is unconstitutional. aud in
"rotr That the Governor may sec clear
~ the path OF duty. YOU invite him IN
read over my ''deiightful essay" which
You contrast so tiisparngingly with tho
searching briefs of Mr. Fred lIarDrr
Oh i.ynchburg, and senator Walker
without commenting upon the taste
ana propTicty displayed In This styIe OF
argument, | wish To say that / pre-
pared neither an "css:.y.' (delIrhtfnI
or otherwisc) nor a written argument
nor ana lse anything in my brief his
eussioh Of the subject before the SEN
'le committee, except a rough mem
oTandum Of some authorities which |
had made. ] had at tho ,Ime n co,y
OF paper containing statement of
INC case ana a brief discussion of Tie
points. prepared by Mr.. icakc. Of thc
Richmond bar, but did not have oc-
o oin to use H. When had com
m moranda / had tinciuding Mr.
l.cakc's briefp over to My Walker me
chairman, at his request ana for his
use These papers must have found
their way 10 you. and ! suppose you
had In mind MIR. Lcakc'S very clear
statement AMI discussion when YOU re-
iier so contemntuously to my delight
You refer to nc as counsel before
Tho General Assembly for City Treas
urer Adams, OF Lynchhu:g" In tins
connection wish to say that | stated
to the Legislative committee In tho
outset that had examined the uucs-
ii9n n IN" REQUEST or my friend. AR
Adams' who was anxious to nave my
opinion concerning it. and had con-
scented as friendly act to him. ana he
cause ! heartily approved 'ih- bin 10
mpnear before the committee and state
my Views FOR whatever they were
worth This ] did as briefly rs pos
nihlc. aud that is the Who'll story so
iar as am concerned hua no In
beyond friendly interest in Mr.
Adams. and II desire to see what
considered vicious provisions stricken
from our fundamental law Mr. Harper
likewise appeared and made m arl;li-
inent and also flied a "scarching brief"
in the interest OF n friend. hut in on
position TO the bill, ana vet YOU an
plaud him and Icnoinca nc The sum
of my offending seems to be that 7
entertained AN opinion on a question
OF constitutional law different from
yours and ventured 20 express It, and
for this incurred the penalty OF haW-
ing you pass iudgmen; publicl,. on nv
Intelligence and motives. Such IN
tolerance OF an honest difference of
opinion on the part OF Il public Journal
is not calculated 10 inspire Confidence
in its breadth Of view. or the accuracy
OF It's information concerning ques-
tons which II undertakes TO discuss
RANDOLPH HARRISON
Richmond