The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-04-04
Virginia S Supreme Need

Speaking the other day Of the pronounced
and weli-sustaned activity In Local business mess
circles and the notable progress which is eacn
year being scored by tho city in substantial
growth and development, we attributed the con.
here to be content with rewards already won
1t would he Well for Virginia If this frame 81
mind permeated its every county and city, ana
related Itself to public affairs as well as 10 puEI-
ness enterprise. The old state needs 10 De
tHr5lIpd with the spirit of a wholesome dlscoh-
tent It's people have too long been luleu mo
civic apathy and civic Incidence by preach-
ments that all is Will and as result we ma
that Virginia is not keeping step with the
march of public progress. 1t is too much as
posed to be content II is disposed to be snug
gish and Indifferent when confronted with de-
fects in its public policy which in all justice,
and in all wisdom and as a matter of com
mon, everyday civic righteousness should De
romedied.
Consider for example, Nrginia's tax system
Who win say that it does not need reformation =
Who will deny that Virginia has too long De.
laycd and dalled with the work of tax reform .
Any one who viii SO say or SO deny thereoN
makes himself responsible for the proposltl"h
that inequality in the distribution OF the taN
burden is right--that scheme of assessment
permitting the same value to he taxed vastly
higher in some counties than In others is right.
that il is all just and fair for some counties
to draw more out Of the state treasury IN the
way of criminal expense than they pay m ana
for other counties to pay more TO the state
that they receive. and hence to have the money
Of the taxpavers in the latter counties devoted
to taking care in part of the expenses OF the de-
lnQueut Counties-that policy making II SO
mar the same value has to sustain double or
propcr-and for various other equally remark
able and equally mdefensible ideas
is it heresy to call attention to these things
We hope not. is it UNI ltriotic? Is 1t an tvt-
depce Of party recreancy or party treacherX for
Democrat say thete things, and by the
statement thereof. seek to stir the Virginia
people to mood of militant discomfort? God
save the Commonwealth If II is. Does 1t prop
crly invite the scorn and rdcule of the sleek
and the stabilized and those who are dro"slly
content to urge considerations Of the sort upon
the conscience and the good sense Of the cleo
torate now when candidates for the general as
sembly presenting their claims for prefer
nent2 Is it a sign of senseless intermeddllng
with things that should he let alone, to preach
the gospel of discomfort as q forerunner to the
gospel and deeds of constructive remedy? or
should we Democrats leave such things to Re
publcans? No. say we-and we say 1t with all
the emphasis at our command. Those who are
urging a do-nothng policy with reference to
Nirginia's public affairs doing that for which
Virginia can justly them no thanks. Their
philosophy tends to shack1e the Commonwealth
In the bonds of decrepttude; to interfere with
I her progress and dun her senses by the hate
full narcotic of a false cuntentment and mis-
( taken notion of her obligations.
The doctrine Of laissez faire is a thing that
ought to be kicked out Of the back door Of Nir-
ginia politics by the toe of the Democratic boot
+ 1t il a reprehenabe doctrine far as Virginia
/ is concerned 1t is ennervating 1t induces to
torpor 1t makes public spirit sleepy 1t deadens
cheney Of public service.-lynchburg News.