The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-03-06
DIR. efACLACHLAN's POSITION ON ANTI
VICE LAW,

VICE LAW. i
In The VirGiniGn OF yesterday there was q
running editorial comment on the history of the
anti-vce bill in the general assembly. And the
names of those who appeared at the public hear
ing on February 25th mentioned, both those
who favored the bill and those who opposed the
bill. 1t was stated, Others who spoke favor
ing the bill we're: Or. c. V. Darlington and DR..
w. a. Christian, and Or. IL. n. Maclachlan. the
latter expressing himself as favoring delay An
putting the law into effect until January l. 1915"
Later on reference was made in the editorial
to the executive session." at which session, how
ever It developed that a number of persons were
in attendance by invitation Of the committee
The Virgnian did not mention the names of any
persons present at that meeting except the Rev.
John w. Shackford. It was also stated that q
representative of the TtnlesDtspatch was
present The Tjmes-Dispatch In its report of the
meeting declared 'even the most earnest advo
Gates of the passage of the bill agreed that It
should be provided that it would not take effect
for some time in order to give an opportunity to
the authorities to prepare to meet conditions"
In discussing this statement OF the Times Dts
patch, The Vtrotntan stated. Certainly the gen.
tleman who advocated deferrlng action until the
owners Of houses could be given opportunity to
arrange their property interests is not an
earnest friend of the bill even though he be
a minister"
1 DR. Maclachlan has stated to The VirGintdn that
he thinks the editorial of The Virotntam, re-
ferred to above, is calculated to produce the i'm
preston that he favored delay in putting the law
into effect until January /. 1915. until the own
ers Of the houses could be given opportunity to
arrange for their property interests The Ftr-
ginaaH has not only desire to produce that i'm
preston upon its readers but on the contrary de-
sres that its readers shall understand that DR..
Maclaehlan does not hold that position. DIR.
Maclachan spoke at the public hearing on Wed
nesday February 25th and stated his position
clearly. He said that he favored the passage of
/ the BILL but that he did not think that the law
should take effect until January l. 1915 because
he desired that ample time should be given for
the authorities to prepare to take of the
inmates Of the houses after they closed,
taken by DR. Maclachlan for reasons indicated
below but II has accorded to him from the be-
ginning sincerity in the position which he has
taken, and In the belief that it would be dam
age to the inmates OF the houses to close them
in June. The Tirgindn did not have DR.. Mac
laChlan in mind in its statement concerning the
executive session." No name is mentioned ex-
~. os eol,f ,,.Lo 20
be opposed to delay, but The Virginian can under
stand that some persons might think that a
reference to Dir. Maclachlan was intended where
1t is indicated that 1t was advocated that action
be deferred until the owners of the houses could
be given opportunity to arrange their property in
position nor does he hold that position, and he
has requested The Trginidn to state that fact in
It's columns that no one may attribute such views
to him
As indicated above The Virginidn does not
agree with DIR. Maclachlans position that the
law should not take effect until January l. 1915,
although it gives full credit to the motives un-
DERIVING his views. The Vbginidn sees no rea.
son why the law should not have an emergency
clause attached to 1t, so that 1t might go into
effect Immediately upon the signature of the
governor. The governor could hold the bill up
for the full five days allowed by Law BEFORE afhx-
ing his signature, and it would require a few
days for the machinery of the law to be put into
operation. When the bill was passed by con-
gress. President Wilson withheld his signature
rs long as possible, as to give time for the
inmates Of the houses to leave them, and to find
shelter elsewhere and there difficulty in
caring for all the women who were willing to be
cared for There were comparatively few who
would accept the honest employment offered TO
them by the good women of the District Of
Columbia, They did not desire to engage in
honest work, but went to other cities and entered
houses Of a similar nature. and continued their