The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1917-11-02

was taken that the Auti-S Saloon League
of Virginia was 'Iniuring the Demo
lcratic Party" becau~a { had published
the replies OF the Republican candi-
dates for state offices to the questions
of the headquarters committee OF the
EAntl-Saloon league concerning the
tposition of those candidates on the
tfTohi%ition question. and because the
, hea dquarters committee OF the league
had declared that the answers OF the
Republican candidates are "Satisfac-
tory" and that the record OF the can
Ididatcs on the prohibition question is
! "GOod"
/ The Times Dispatch editorial so
iman!festly misa pprehended the prin-
ciples and the functions of the Anti
Saloon league, that the superintendent
4of the league sent reply 10 the Times
/ Dispatch, which reply was published
/ In the issue OF that paper Of October
/ 81, and the same is given In full be-
/ low.
In the Daily independent. Of Har-I-
sonhurg. Of the issue OF October rs
there IS a rcpart Of the speech by
] Professor RuebUsh, In which Profess
/ sor Ruebush says:
II thought the organization was
/ free from politics The Anti Saloon
! league fought Westm oreland Davis
nomination, saying he was not right
] on the liquor question, and yet we see
The leader OF the same organization.
through its mouth piece, The Richmond
! Nirginlan, supporting DAVIS for the
reason that the only hope for moral
reform is through the Democratic
party. and at the same time its leaders
are now In Washington sending back
+ pnnn4tg n gYS ~. ~.
cation, to send funds to help make
! Washington dry The people have
! lost faith in an organization which
VIII sell itself to a political party
/ Professor Ruehush Is mistaken
when he declares that the And Saloon
+ league as an organization fought West
Imoroland Davis nomination. The
+ Anu-Saloon league. AK an orga II lzation
/ Through its headquarters committed
lf'mply published the records of
Messrs. Davis, E1lyson and Pollard,
and their replies to the questions pro
| pounded by the committee, and stat
led whether the record and position OF
each candidate was good" and salts
/ fatory," or otherwise. Having per-
! formed that function the headquar.
tiers committee distinctly stated that
| having given information to the voters
concerning the record and position
Of candidates, il was then left to the
voters to decide for whom they would
vote.
Professor Ruehush has fallen into
the same error as the Times Dispatch
! In confusing the Anti Saloon League
/ of-A irgiala A. an organization with
! individual members Of the league For
! exam pie, Professor Ruebush stated In
his speech that he had been a work
Ing member of the AntiSsloon league
since It's organization and he Is also
n candidate for office on the Repub-
lican ticket. But Professor Ruebush
the member of the Anti Saloon league,
Is not the candidate Of the Republican
party. but Professor Euebush as an in
dividual citizen Is. The fact that he
has decided as citizen to be a candi-
date Of the Republican party and to
support the other Republican nominees
has nothing whatever to do with his
relation to the Anti-saloon league. He
Icertain1y does not claim that he ia a
Republican candidate as an Anti -Sa-
loon Lacquer, hut as an individual c.ti-
lien.
In exactly the sshte way, the un-
dersignod will certainly not vote for
Mir Davis as superintendent of the
Anti Sa loon League of Virginia. He
VIII vote for him as an individual citi-
zen, and as he states in the reply to
1.-THE Times Digpatch, published below,
he Will do so, IL for no other reason.
because according 10 his understand
ing participation in the Democratic
primary bound him to support the
nominees OF that primary, unless
there were developments after the
; primary sufficient to Justify the re
pudistion or that nomination.
On exactly the same principle. while
The Richmond Virgiuian as q news
paper was established, and has been
maintained as a prohibition paper. is
the property OF individual citizens Of
i virginia who have put over quarter
at a million -daIlar@ tftt, the establish
ment and maintenance If that paper.
They would not have done that simply
to establish a Democratic newspaper
t3et-I- fft4le-4t-t~ true that The owners
OF that paper are prohibitionists yet
The Richmond NirEinian Is not the
lmouthpiece of The AntI-Saloon League
Eof Virginia In the sense that IL is un-
der the control of the Anti Saloon
League Of Virginia. The Anti Saloon
League Of Virginia has never made
itself liable for the maintenance. or
for the debts of The Richmond Vir-
| ginian. The NirgInian has simply
been an invaluable ally of the prohi-
bftion cause. II Is not proper 10 de-
inounce the Anti-Saloon League of Nir-
ginia because the management Of The
! Richmond Firginian has declared
from the beginning that It Is a Demo
cratic newspaper committed to the
support of prohibition. But the man
agemeut OF that paper must determine
at every stage what shall be the atri-
tude of the paper at any given time
and because The Richmond Vtrgtniar
! has decided under allthe circumstances
] that II will support Mr.. Davis for
governor is no reason for q deuuncia-
tion OF the Anti-Saloon League Of Wy
gIna.
! The fact that the Times Dispatch
attacked the league as "In1uri11E the
/ Democratic Party because the head
quarters committee was entirely fair
TO the Republican candidates, AID the
| fact on the other hand that Professor
! Ruebush Is attacking the league as
unfair to the Republican party, would
seem to indicate that the league has
/ been fair TO both the Democrats and
Republicans, and has performed its
function OF giving informa ton to tho
voters % the state with strict impair
TALLY.
The article which was printed In
the Times Dispatch on October Fl fol-
lows
Anti-SaIoon League Is Norpartisan