The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-03-13
FRIDAY. MARCH IL. 1914.
THE HOUSE 10 RE CONGRATULATED.

THE HOUSE 70 RI CONGRATULATED.
The house Of delegates Of Virginia took an
action TODAY On which It should be congratulated
by all fair minded people, In adopting with
practical unanimty the report Of the committee
On privileges and elections In reference to the
question Of personal privilege raised by Delegate
Myers, Of Richmond. Any other action would
have sci q precedent which would have been
subject 70 constant abuse and would have re-
turned times without number 10 plague the
house and TO consume important time. Perhaps
there is no one feature Of legislative life which
has develor more oninously In recent years than
the constant appeal TO "a question Of personal
privilege" This method is invoked on all sorts
Of occasions and for so great variety of pur.
poses, that It has become somewhat matter OF
rtdtcule, when a man rises and claims the floor
on question Of personal privilege. It is abso-
futsy necessary to set the bounds somewhere.
other-wfse these privileged questions will impair
The efficiency os legislative bodies.
he house Of delegates In adopting the report
Of its committee on yesterday pat effectua
a1ietus on the idea. that interviews between
representative and their constituents are proper
subjects for action by legislative body. In SO
doing il distinctly repudiated the position taken
by Delegate Myers. that q conversation between
him and his constituents should be given to the
public through the medium OF speech the
floor Of the house OF delegates under the guise
Of a personal privilege. 1t is natural that Mr.
Myers should be dissatisfied by the failure of the
committee and Of the house to endorse hts ex-
sraordinary action II is also natural that DR.
Christian should be somewhat disappointed that
q full investigation was not ordered that he
might be given an opportunity TO disprove the
statements made by Mr.. Myers on the floor of
the house OF delegates where Dr. Christian
nas denied the right of reply. But it is not
necessary 10 take up the time of the house Of
delegates nor to cucumber it's record with per
sonal differences between delegates and their
constituents II such differences arise let them
be eettled privately in the newspapers or in
the courts. That is the fair aud proper way TO
settle such matters. To take them to the floor
of the house of delegates, where only one side
can be heard. and where that side is protected
by the constitution from any appeal to the courts
Of the State Is exceedingly unfair. aud that fact
alerie should preclude tho idea of carrying such
matters into that privileged realm.
Certain incidents connected with the report
nf The c01n1ni.len mere rearotable The refusal
Of Mr. Myers TO accept that report as final and
his declaration, that the committee had not
treated him fairly, deserved exactly the kind
Of rebuEe that Judge Williams very promptly
gave to such statements. The withdrawal by
n Judge Williams Of his name from the paper,
expressing confidence In The yeraeity and legis-
iative, integrity Of Mr.. Myers was entirely
, ;ustiaablc That paper was not the action Of
the committee. but was paper drawn up and
signed by various members OF the committee as
indiyiduals, Judge Williams was acting entirely
within his right in Withdrawing his name.
The yelled attack OF Mr.. Myers upon DIT Can
non, the Representative Of DIR, Christian before
the .suboonmittee, was misStatement Of the
facts. Or. Cannon stated publicly TO the sub
committee. that as the representative OF Dr.
Christian nc did not hihl it proper to suggest
what method Of procedure the committee should
pursue, that the committee must decide for it.
SELF, whether the matter in question was a
proper sub5ect for legislative action, but that
should the conitec decide That IT was proper
subject for legislative action nr. Christian de
sired full and open investigation Of all the
facts When called upon by 'he committee to
make statement. DR. Christian took exactly
ne same position as THAT taken by Or. Cannon.
After comforting together the subcommittee sent
for Or. Cannon and Delegate Willis for private
conference As that conference was executive
10 Its nature Dr. Cannon has never made any
public statement Of what occurred. Bat his pub.
Tic statement before the committee Was clear
Intimation that in his Judgment the matter was
rot a proper subject for legislative action and
from that position he has never varied But
4 he has stated that should the committee decide
\ sther~ise. that then there should be full and
u open investigation. The report Of the proceed
4 Ings before the subcommittee published in the
Kfehnoad tyoinsan OF Wednesday, March 18th
shows that Dr. Cannon took tina, position at the
open session.
s4 ssAtaa above these incidents are regretable