The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-06-21
A Fruitless Fusillade

1 In its yesterdays issue the Richmond Times
Dispatch, responding to adverse comments upon
Tits anti-lohby campaign took occasion to repro
| duce many of it's previous criticisms against
what IL peases 10 designate as the plunderbund
or the office holders trust.
4 To the extent that the Times Dispatch Is bat
Ting against the operation of evil lobby infu-
ences in the general assembly Of Virginia, it has
our very earnest sympathy And it would be-
sides enjoy the vgiant cooperation of this
newspaper in stirring up public sentiment
against the evi-and We believe of many other
newspapers in the State-were its propaganda
not mistakenly predicated and conducted
with such violence of temper and indiscriminate
abuse of those whom 1t believes to be deserving
of criticism by this course ii Is In our humble
judgment affording genuine satisfaction to the
lobby forces that actually deserve 10 he dis
credited. That Ia to say, by comprehending per-
fectly legitimate lobby effort with questionable
lobby objects and methods and leaders 1t is
driving from the support of Its fight for better
things a large element of the people who other
wise would promptly and enthusiastically follow
its lead. The pity of it that this is so
An illustration of our meaning is to be found
in the attitude of our neighbor with respect to
sioners OF the revenue in behalf of A resuhmis-
sion of the article to the constitution bearing
has seen fit to subject these officials TO as viru-
lent and scorching a denunciation as we have
sailed their motives, their methods, the very in
tegrity of their campaign, with venom and cpl
thets that both amaze and shock for their sheer
fury and recklessness.
These city officials did naught that was prop
erly amenabe to criticism. They proceeded
openly in the full light of day They honestly
believed that the manner in which the origi-
nal amendment submitted to the people
not only irregular, but prejudcial to their
rights. They sought advice of counsel, and by
their counsel advised that they not
without reasonable ground for complaint. They
thereupon set about to remedy disCrimina-
ton against their Office holding eligibility
citizens of Virginia. They were vigorously
fought by certain influences. They responded
by themselves showing fight. certain few of
thesr number went to Rtcknond to hook after
the interests Of the entire class. The resubms-
sion act was passed. with no charge Of corrup-
ton or unfair dealings asserted. From the leg
islature the blu taken to the courts, and
courts it transferred to the people, and
was ratified by the people. This state of facts
tended strongly to convince that the treasurers
and commissioners of the revenue were right
in their contention and that the Times Dispatch
was wrong in its position. Nevertheless
less in its Grass, almost personal, abuse of these
officehoders, pillorying them conscience
less political hrgands and holding them up
as examples of the lobby in its most reprehen-
sible and vicious sense. This is all wrong 1t
is all unjust And it has absolutely paralyzing
effect upon the Times-Dspatch campaign for
the elimination of piratical lobby methods.
II the editor of the Times Dispatch held Of
flee. and II he believed that he had been un-
constitutionally legiSlated out of office and had
been advised by competent counsel, what
would he do? Sit quietly down and swallow the
dose Of prejudice to his rights? No? Well. what
then? What ought he to do? Seek to have
the mistake~rectfed ?--Gndouhtedy SO. And
how should he go about it? Why. by first seek
ing the forum that had committed the mistake
and by the presentation of argument to those
constituting that forum, urge that the error be