Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1842-09-02

Hal rights, &C
C. We find the following precious docu-
ment in the Editorial columns of the last
) 'Democrlt. Wishing to ''keep it before
the PeoIe," we give it a conspicuous place
in our Columns, together with Mr.. Burke's
letter tothe Globe, trusting that the posi-
tlon assumed by Mr.. Burke will not con
fuse Tat witty writer in the Demo
crat, VINO signs himself Nowadays"
KEEP 1T BEFORE THE PEOPLE,
Tha on the 18th day of August, 1912, a
bill wa introduced in the House of Repre-
sentaties of the U. S. by c. J. lngersoll, a
democa ATTIC member from Pennsy lyania, pro
posing to enact tariff of duties in accord
arce With the prayer of the petitions before
Congess, and sufficiently high to afford am
ole reenue for the Just wants of the Gov
eTnrnnt and afford reasonable protection to
All th industrial pursuits of the people, and
that aid bill was supported by the demo-
craft; party from the North, and voted down
by lie whole Wing party of the House.
il isthereiore now evident that the Wings,
as aoarty, are willing to sacrifice the tariff
interests of the country and what they con-
iendis essential to the industrial pursuits of
the people, in order to distribute the pro-
ceets of the public lands to benefit the
sTeeulating, stock-obbing and corporation
interests of the States.-GiObe.
Now here are no less than THREE deliberate false
foods in the above article. The Bill was not sus-
hned by the Democrats, and it was not rOted doIcn
by the Wings The motion made by lngersoll was
simply to suspend the rules 10 allow him 10 intro
duce the Bill, and only forty-one, out of the hun
dred Locos in the House. sustained even that mo
ton And to prove that those Locos who voted in
favor OF suspending the rules. would have opposed
the passage ofthe Bill we introduce the following
witness. 1t is letter from Mr.. Edmund Burke
one of the leading Loco Foco members OF the House
from New Hampshire, and is as follows
To the Editor of the Globe.
House OF REPRESENTATIVES,, Aug. Is, 1912.
In communication published in the
Globe of Saturday. referring TO the vote
on the motion of Mr.. G. J. Ingersoll OF
Pennsylvania to suspend the rules of the
House for the introduction of a bill revv-
ing the Tariff Of 1888, the writer remarks
and that bill was sustained by the Democ.
racy of the North, &c. If the writer in.
tends to be understood that all the Demo
cratic members from the North, who voted
in favor of Mr.. Ingersoll's motion, were in
favor OF his biil, and would have voted for
Its passage, l can assure him that, so far as
one who voted for the suspension of the
rules is concerned, he is greatly mistaken
was one Of the Democratic members OF
the North who voted for the suspension Of
the rules, in order to enable Mr.. Ingersoll tc
introduce his bill; bit I,OaS ycry far from
approving the bill itself, in principle and de
tail was influenced by two motives il
giving my vote LIST. Courtesy to the mover
prominent and intelligent member Of on
party; and, secondly desire to give tn
country an earnest that the Democratic par
ty in the House were ready and willing f
make an effort to sustain the credit and hon
or of the Government. And am surprises
to see that the vote, being merely motion
to suspend the rules, (Which is never regard
ed as test notion is cited as a proof tina
the Democratic party of the North sustain
cd the bill and would have voted for its pas
sage For one. / do not sustain it, nor ap
groUe of IL. If that bill is to be regarded
as the Pennsylvania platform, | do no
stand upon it. Iregard it in many lights a
objectionable as the LO,ocH Platform. II
many particulars the Tariff Of 1888 is a
highly protective and as objectionable as tn
one Just vetoed by the President. But sine
hat vote-given as an act of courtesy, b.
ne at least-s cited as proof that all tn
Northern Democracy are in favor of PRO
tcctive Tariff, have felt it due to myself t
say, through your columns, THAT Will
VOTE FOR NO BILL HAVING PRO
lection FOR IT'S OBJECT. l d.
not, of course, object to Protection as al
incident or consequence, of Tariff for reve
nue.. shall vote ONLY FOR A TAR
iFF FOR REVENUE, sufficient to pro
vide for the wants of Government, on al
economical scale of expenditure, with prop
er determinations FOR THAT OBJECT
ALONE, and for the exemption of tea AM
4 coffee from any and all duty.
Respectfully &c.
EDMUND BURKE