The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-02-19

~-~----.---.--'----
the Objectionable character Of this
amendment. but his protest was un-
availing and the amendment was
adopted.
The Last Straw.
This was the proverbiaI last straw
which broke the Camers back ana
for myself, personally. and as rep
resenting my associates on the e%ecu-
tive committee, we considered that
any sort or kind OF implied agree
ment was at an end as an agree
ment which does not bind both sides
does not bind either side. The Dill
having been sent back 10 the house.
the house rejected all the amend
ments including the form Of ballot,
and the conference committee was
given a free hand, The Apt!-Saloon
league determined that 1t would &C
cept whatever report the committee
might make. preferring to take the
bill and go with 1t TO the people. al
lowing them TO decide whether they
would call an election in spite of
the handicaps put upon us by the
bill. From numerous communica~
tions It had become evident that the
III Tie tIidifNt VI N4iN W. 80
Of ballot was much greater than had
been supposed. as there was evidence
Of great confusion concerning the
effect of such a change.
The Test Vote.
Everything. therefore, was thrown
into the melting pot OF the conference
committee. and when the conference
report was made the temperance peo-
pie realized that If this report was nor
adopted, II was very uncertain wheth
err any report at all would be adopted,
and in the judgment of our committee
this was real test vote on the question
as to whether the senate of Virginia
would agree any enabling act, en-
bodying such provisions as would
Justify the temperance people in call
ing an election upon the question of
Statewide prohibition.
Misrcpresented Constituents.
Mr.. Brock seems not to agree with
this view. but intimates in his article
that he did not expect that report to
be adopted. but that another confer
ence would be held before the diff
culties could be adjusted, and that he
did not suppose that the rejection of
the conference report would mean the
defeat OF the bill He furthermore
states that it was not his intention
TO try TO defeat the bill by loading 1t
down with amendments, and yet he
voted for amendments which he knew
TO be very Objectionable, for this was
positively stated on the floor of the
senate and in public print. amend
ments which, If they had not been
modified, would have made the bill
unacceptable to the temperance peo-
pie. Mr.. Brock may be correct in
his statement that the rejection OF the
conference report did not mean the
defeat of the bill and that, therefore.
this vote was not the real test, mt
with this view / am not able to agree
still believe that the vote on the
adoption of the conference report was
as stated in my previous article. the
real test" indeed, "the crucial mo-
ment," and still believe that in vot-
Ing against the adoption of this con-
ference report that "Messrs. Brock
and Early again absolutely misrep-
resented the wishes Of n majority of
their constituents as those wishes were
indicated by the election of members
of the house of delegates.
Mark Words.
Mark the exact words of this state
ment: 'Tt is not declared that Messrs,
Brock and Early deliberately and
knowingly misrepresented the wishes
of majority of their constituents
but it Is positively declared that they
absolutely misrepresented the wishes
of a majority of their constituents as
those constituents had indicated their
wishes by the election of members OF
the house of delegates, and as those
constituents were represented by the
vote OF the members OF the mouse or
delegates. for all three members or
the house OF delegates from Mr.
Early's district, namely: Messrs. Page,
/, inJI AdnDt
report of the conference com mittee.
and three out of four members from
Mr.. Brooks district, namely: Messrs.
Love, Winston and Terrill, voted for
the conference report
Not Among It's Friends.
have no personal feeling in the
matter whatever. | simply do not
agree with Mr.. Brock in his estimate
as to the importance of the vote on
the conference report, / stlli con-
slider it to have been the real test"
the Crucial moment" and I greatly
rejoice that sufficient number of the
members Of the senate did recognize
the great Importance attaching To the
abortion OF this conference report so
as TO secure it's adoption then. without
sending ii back to another conference
that ii might be shaped to suit the
views of senators who were wiling to
run lne i1sh OF the usleat VI WV 'A.'
rather than to vote for that which
the temperance leaders and the house
of delegates had decided to accept
cannot agree that such senators were
friends Of the bill. but still think they
deserted and joined with the enemies
of the bill who desired to load down
the bill with az many Objectionable
amendments as possible.
JAMES CANNON. J r.,
Superintendent Anti-Saloon League OF
Virginia.
Richmond. Va. February 10. 1914