The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1917-07-14

unthinkable to elect a man with such
tangled mental processes to the high
| position of governor of the prohibit
| ton state of Virginia?
| Moreover, Mr.. Davis declared in his
letter of September 10. 1914, that
| "Virginia's progress should not be
paralyzed through the bitterness en-
gendered by the perpetuation in poll
tics of a moral question" Do the
prohibition voters of Virginia think
a man Is fitted to be governor of the
| prohibition commonwealth of Virginia
who In spite of the evidences of waste
and misery and crime, which always
accompany the saloon, believed that
statewide prohibition would para
lyze the Industrial development and
| progress of the state?
Third. Notwithstanding the fact
that the prohibition law in Virginia
has been In effect only eight months.
and is generally recognized as one of
the most important public issues be-
| fore the people OF the state, when Mr.
Davis made his announcement on the
2Sth of May, 1917, OF his candidacy
for governor, he did not say one word
concerning the prohibition question
! He emphasized the bonding OF com
mission merchants" the 'standardi-
cation OF ice cream. etc" the "em-
| ployment of convicts on the public
roads" but he did not say one word
concerning prohibition, although the
| official records show that the number
| of convicts for penitentiary offenses
| has only been about onehalf as great
since prohibition went into effect. 1t
Is not denied that the Standardization
of ice cream, and the bonding OF COM
mission merchants, and the employ
ment OF convicts are matters OF i'm
| portance, but is any man At to be
governor OF Virginia who does not
consider the great question OF PROFIT
bition. which is stirring not only the
state but the nation, as of sufficient
| Importance to justify single word
in his declaration Of principles, and
| thinks the employment OF convicts
of more importance than the policy
| OF reducing the number of Convicts :?
Fourth. Mr. Davis declines to COM
NIT himself concerning future prohi-
| bftion legislation. AS indicated above,
Mr.. Davis did not consider prohibit
ton OF sufficient Importance to mem
ton in his platform whether he Will
cooperate with the prohibition ma
| tority to strengthen and perfect the
Mapp Law, and instead of stating
whether he favors the adoption OF a
prohibition constitutional amendment
| for the state of Virginia, thus writin z
prohibition in the organic laws OF
the state. he declines absolutely to
pledge himself to favor such amend
ment on the ground that the characte
of the amendment is not defined. II
Is quite remarkable that no one OF
the other eight candidates to whom
the letter OF the league was sent was
unable to understand the character
of the proposed amendment All of
the other candidates answered the
question frankly and explicitly with
ont any sort OF quibbling or evasion.
Do the. prohibition voters Of Vir-
ginia believe that any man should be
elected governor of the state who Is
either unable or unwilling TO give
clear and explicit answers to the ques-
tons propounded by the headquarters
committee OF the leaguee
From no desire to criticIse Mr. Da =
Wis, but In justice to the constituency
which we represent. we must empha-
size the fact that Mr.. Davis record
and his replies to the questions OF the
league letter Of June IL are apparent
ly purposely so worded as to be en-
tirely acceptab BILE to the wet voters
of the state.
The headquarters committee OF the
Anti Saloon league would be false te
it's trust If 1t did not emphasize the
important fact that there are two can
didates for nomination for governor
who are openly and confessedly dry :
and one candidate whose record and
position are shown to be wet" Ex-
perience has shown that even in a
| dry state like Virginia wet" can.
didate has sometimes been nominated
by combination OF wet" voters
and some misinformed dry" voters
because of a division of the dry
votes between the two dry candi.
dates
Having presented the facts as tc
the record and the position of Messrs
Davis, Etlyson and Pollard on the pro.
bibition question, we urge our pro.
hihition leaders In every section OF
Virginia TO make the above facts
| known TO the prohibition voters OF
the state, so that at this very i'm
portant stage In our prohibition re-
form In Virginia no n.an-nay vote
for any candidate In ignorance Of his
position on the question Of paramount
Importance to the economic and moral
betterment OF the state. Evidences are
rapidly multiplying that the opponents
of the present statewide law are lin
ing up their forces in support OF the
candidacy OF Mr.. Davis. because they
believe him TO be favorable TO their
lcause. The issue. therefore, Is plain
lily presented. whether prohibition
voters will combine with wet" voters
of Virginia 10 nominate a man with
such a wet record and position as
that of Mr.. Davis.
Candidates for Attorney General
The records OF Hon. Jnn r. Saun-
ders and Hon. Hugh A. White should
be carefully considered by the prohi-
bition people OF the state.
Hon. John r.. Saunders.
The record OF Mr.. Saunders Is I'M
usually fine. Mr.. Saunders. as a mem
Der of the senate Of Virginia for ten
years has been very active and ef-
ficient in his support of prohibition
Legislation. He was. along with Sena-
tors Mapp. Walker and West. one OF
the four patrons of the enabling act
which gave TO the people of the state
an opportunity to vote on statewide
prohibition. After the passage of the
enabling act. he made a number OF
,speeches in favor of prohibition dur
ing the campaign in the summer OF
1874.
He was also, along with Senators
Mapp. walker and West one OF the
patrons OF the Mapp bill. and gave
much time and thought in assisting
to frame that splendid piece of legis-