The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-03-04
Majority OF Minority.

! was the argument of SIR. Catron, a
! Republican. He had peen. he de-
{ clared. a United States revenue off,
/ Ger. and had seen prohibition laws
/ violated at first hanG. ffe was Al
! member of the BAPTIST church, "a
/ Their of five children, and wanted bet
/ ter moral conditions as much as any
| one. He did not think Statewide
/ prohibition would bring better con-
ditions.
j II am glad" said Mr.. Catron. the
| time has come to settle this question.
l have had experience III the traffic
! and having been a revenue officer
| know something about 1t. l under
/ stand that the Democratic party is
: pledged FOR the enabling act. but the
I Republican party is not / am the
man who proposed local option in
| the Republican State platform. | am
+ the man who spoke for 1t In the Re
| publican State convention
- s-HaN- party has not declared Tor
prohibition / am going to vote against
! it. / did not come here pledged for
Il and am not going to vote for 1t for
that reason.
There Is more Illicit whiskey dis
tillinp in southwest Virginia now that
we are drN than under the wide open
/ ttquor laws.
= ScnHioF huty.
| A senator's duty to his constituency
and to God was put upon high plane
by Col j. F. West. OF Suffolk. one of
the patrons of the bill.
II represent" said Colonel West "a
Christian constituency. l believe
Christian senator who stands here to
seree man and God should bring Chris
tianity into the chamber He should
vote upon a great moral question as
God and his constituency would have
him. l believe righteousness exalteth
a nation.
This is largely matter Of educa-
ton. The reason the opposition is
! against the bill Is not because they do
not think they are right, but because
thev look at the question from the
wrong viewnoint. There WAS once
time when people Thought slavery was
right. They do not now. In the oath
:, ! took here I swore not to engage in
! duels Once people fought duets, but
! thev do not any more.
People look at life and morality
different from what they once did. The
1 senn.or from Green the other day
| called attention to Stonewall Jackson
and Robert E. Lee. like to think
( of these men and the age in which
they lived. Theirs WAS n time when
manhood was put ahead of money.
The great leader. Stonewall Jackson.
went down on his knees before en-
gaging in a battle
Another OF Minority.
Mr.. Parr. a Republican. opposed the
| bill. He took the position that there
/ is no demand for the measure and
supported his claim with the state
ment that not one-tenth Of the people
of the State have petitioned the Leg
islature to vote for the bill.
They ask u.s., he said. ITO pass this
measure when not 10 "er cent. OF the
people of the State have demanded 1t.
I dare say less than one-tenth have
petitioned- the General Assembly. I
defy any man to prove there ia a gen
erat demand for such legislation
Speaking of a statement by DR..
Wicker Monday night that money in
terest was the cause of opposition to
the bill. Mr.. Parr declared he did not
believe any member OF the Senate had
been paid anything to vote against it.
He had not and was sure there was
not n senator who would accept money
for his vote.
Mr.. PARIS remarks led to the belief
that he understood the minister to
mean senators were actuated by mer-
eenary Interest.
Mr.. Gayle declared the people of
Virginia were demanding prohibition
ana l1HC IN NTS}nla t1e DeppSe TuiS-
Mr.. Wendenhirg on institution.
The bill was attacked on IT. con-
stitutionaiity by Mr.. Wendenburg. who
Was armed with p great array Of. law
( books and authorities. Cooley was
quoted for the most part. He at
tackled the Anti-Saloon League and
its officers, and declared they wanted
law that had no foundation under
the Constitution.
My constituency is honorable and
honest am going to vote against
the bill. I have taken no oath ex-
cept the one taken here have
madez no rash promises In heated
/ controversy.
I'm Mr. Walkers argument local
option alone was dealt with. This is
not the question. There liz no ques-
ton THAI local option laws are con-
stitutional The question before us
Is whether this ienab!ing act Is con-
slitutional.
Local governments made the State
and a larger central government.
These little republics. as called by
Thomas Jefferson, became centralized
only upon condition that they retain
their local rights. Now you propose
to take away these local rights. by
sheer weight OF numbers you propose
to destroy the representative form of
government In Virginia.
This act IL misleading. The cart
In put before the horse. You propose
to call an election; then you 60 and
say there shall be no liquor manu-
featured or sold. You ask us to send
mere skeleton to the people to be
voted upon and to have life put into
It, Legislation under the Constitu-
aion ~ vested In the Legislature and
not in the people. Tho Constitution
says the law-making power 10 in the
hands of the Legislature. I do not
believe the people of the State know
this or they would not ask for an
| ena bling act.
/ I'VE are asked to be faithless to
1 our oaths and violate the Constitu-
ton. We are asked to relieve our
selves Of the responsibility OF law
making and place the burden upon
| the people.
Il care nothing for the merits or
dement's OF the prohibition question.
We cannot AFFORD to violate our oaths
to uphold the Constitution because or
| passion or prejudice."
| Mr.. Featherston declared he would
vote for the btu because II was mo-
rally. politically and constitutionaliy
right. Every argument. he said. that
had been advanced ON the Moor might
4 - wsil " advanced - the people ~
I 4SXs 81 u N4