The Washington herald., 1917-01-22
The District Referendum.

the current issue espousing the cause
of prohibition.
Senator Underwood, in advocating
a referendum for the Sheppard bill,
said in part: "The people of the
District are being controlled by the
government of the United States as
despotically as the Car OF Russia
controlled the people OF that country
before the establishment OF the
Duma, their parliamentary body
people without representation, people
without voice, people whose prop
erty will be conhscated and people
who may be given very much worse
condition OF public morals if this law
goes on the statute books and is en-
forced than they will have under
present legislation. | say, give them
the opportunity now, and in the
future, to go along this road if they
think it right. Appeal, if you will, to
their conscience, their intelligence,
their brains, but at least give them
the right of self-government. Give
them the freedom which the great
Fundamental law of the land, the Con-
stitution of the United States, guar
antees to the balance of u.s."
Commenting upon which Golfers
says with a hnality that would be
amusing if it were not amazing:
Now this is all very true The
people of the District of Columbia
do not have vote upon their own
affairs. Their government is neither
chosen nor operated by themselves; /;
it is passed down to them by Con-
gress. Congress acts as town coun-
Gil for the District, and it is all the
government the District has. But all
this has been true for several decades.
If it is wrong now, it has been wrong
for long time. If it is wrong as to
prohibition, it is wrong as to every
other detail of District affairs. Until
the question came up it never occur
red seriously to Congress that the
District ought to have a referen-
dunn. Senator Underwood's sugges-
ton would have been more convinc-
ing if he had made it wider. As it
is, he has made it difficult for his
friends to combat the feeling of the
advocates of prohibition that the
move for a referendum is merely dila-
tory"
By what hypothesis does Golfers
arrive at the conclusion that it has
never occurred seriously to Congress
that the District ought to have a
The referendum was an
issue in the hall of Congress long
before the question of prohibition for
the District ever became an acute
question.
Trade bodies, business men, civic
organizations and hundreds of citi-
zens, leaders in the commercial and
professional life of the city, have
long urged that the citizens of the
city be given representation in Con-
gress and the right of suffrage, which
is the referendum in its broadest
sense.
Senator Jones introduced such a
bill and it is now pending. Several
years ago Representative Tavenner,
Of Illinois, introduced a bill to give
the citizens the right to vote. An
other bill is sponsored by Senator
Chamberlain, and the recent bill by
Representative Cary submits referen-
dunn questions of more Importance to
residents of the District than the
matter of dry" city.
This afternoon a committee of rep
rescntative business men will meet at
the Chamber of Commerce to outline
plans for mass meeting to impress
upon Congress the desirability of en-
franchising the voters.
The Herald maintains that it is
wrong now. that it has been wrong
for a long time, and that it is wrong
as to prohibition, as to every other
detail of the District affairs-to
thrust laws upon the books vitality
the business and social life
of the people of this city without
giving them the same rights to pass
upon them that the people in every
other city in the country enjoy. And
this constitutes no argument against
prohibition, but for a broader prin-
ciple-justice.
When Golfers asserts that it
never occurred seriously to Congress
before it is evidence that its hearing
on the question has been confined to
the editorial sanctum. Certainly it
has not extended to the confines of
the District of Columbia.
If; Then Why?