Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-04-03
SUNDAY EOssNING, APRIL ), 1859.


The Platform OF the Opposition.
We have said in a previous paragraph that it was
difoult to tell Whstherths Opposition in construct
ing their platform, employed words more 10 make
kaOWa their ideas or to conceal them but Fortunate
~ il requires very definite expression Of inten
tiOn from that party to enable us to comprehend
them, when We have that which is better than pro-
sssi0as-thsir practices.
One of The leading questions that has always di
vided the Democracy and their federal opponents,
under Whatever name, was that Of the Tariff; the
Democracy cOntending that "justice and sound
policy forbid the federal government to foster one
branch of industry the detrimsnt Of another, BY
means Of Protective Tariff or otherwise that no
more revenue ought to be raised than is necessary
for en- economical administration Of the government
and that in adjusting the standard of duties, the
burdens should be imposed upon Injuries, rather
than neeessaries-on such articles as would throw
the tax according to the ability to pay, on property
rather than eperson and hence the ed paIOrs sys-
TEN. Our federal opponents have opposed this pol,
icy, detrimental TO the growth and proper develop
ment Of our domestic manufactures insisting thai
"protectiOn" as encouragement to home industry
should be made the leading feature of our revenue
system. Hence the Opposition has had its princi
pal strength in the manufacturing States of the
North and the Democracy in the agricultural States
of the South and West Every honest man of eth
or party will coneeds the correctness aud fairness
Of statement of the differences that have divided
rs upon this subject recurrence 10 these facts
is necessary to proper understanding of the next
plank of the recently constructed platform, which
reads as follows:
Ill That we are opposed to direct taxation and
In favor Of the adoption of a tariff adequate to the
expenses Of economical administration Of the
general government, with specific duties, where ap
plieabie, discriminating in favor of American in
dustry.
Here is the old protective doctrine reasserted but
seemingly Worded with the view of keeping in the
back ground, as much possible, the Determines
Of the protective system. The great bulk Of the
Opposition lies 81 the North. They elamor for more
protection from foreign competition, that they may
demand Of the consumers st the South higher pri
ess for their manufactures. They want protection
which win enable them to demand of the Tonnes
see farmer higher price for their cotton and WOOL
len fabrics, their axes, hoes, trace chains, and
other manufactures of iron. This is what is dimly
Swallowed forth BY specific duties where applioa-
bic, DISCRIMINATING in faUOr of American iadustry"
be framed The Democratic party of the South
and South West think not, and the great mass of
our people with them They are tired of paying
tribute to the millionaire Of New England and the
iron m0ngers of Pennsylvania. The early legisla-
tiOn Of the country may have contemplated the fos
tsring of then infsnG Manufacturer and eneour-
aging the production Of indispensable articles, so
As to render our country independent Of foreign
governments in Of war but the objects which led
TO such system Of duties have long since been at
tAined though the large interests that have grown
up under it have increased their olsmor from lima to
time for its continuance just in the proportion that
il has been least deserved. The true Democratic the
DRY upon this subject which never SO important
to the SOthern States at the present, is, in the
language Of Secretary COBB, in his able report to
Congress, Of December last, that "such duties
should be laid IS will produce the required reve-
nue., by imposing the people at large TIE SMALL
8sT AND THE MOST EQUAL BURDENS. 1t is obvious
that this is eectuslly done by taxing, in pre-
ference others such articles as are not produced
in this country; and among articles produced here,
those in which the home product bears the lesst
proportion to The quantity imported are the ftest
for taxation. The reason is that in taxing articles
not made in the country the whole sum taken from
the consumer goes into the treasury, while in the
other class the consumer pays the enhanced value,
not only on the quantity imported bat on the guam
tity made at home. This last tax is paid, not to
the treasury, but 10 the manufacturer thereby rem
dsring such duty not Only more burdensOme, but
grossly uneqsl the home producer being benefit
ted at the expense Of the consumer" Such are the
differences between the two parties on this question
II is one which viii properly, and necessarily, be-
come leading issue in the ensuing canvass, and
ass9ut which We shall have more to say in future
Their fourth declaration reads
That the Uaited States should accept the Island |
Of Cuba at any time when il be acquired consss
tenty with the national honor, and should resist 10 /
the last extremity, its transfer to any foreign power
Without stepping to critless the phraseolOgy of |
shis proposition, We are gratifed that the wisdom
Of the Democratic party in seeking to acquire Cuba
is tseitly recognized and endorsed. We trust that
our friends are sincere in what they have declared,
and will not seek to qualify out of it when the
question presents itself in more practical shape
We should be excused for questioning their sincsri
" when it is remembered that the position which
this dedication places them in, is in direct conflict
with every circumstance Of their past history. The
declared policy of the opposition heretofore has al
ways been against the acquisition Of territory, or
the extension Of cur boundary. They have depre-
eatedit FOR reasons which we're assigned with mas
terly ability BY their CLAWS and their WEpsTERa in
days past Notwithstanding the large and valuable
acquisitions CT Territory which have been made
from time to time, the policy was in every instance
carried against the most determined resistance from
the opposition They opposed the acquisition from
France Of the very territory which commands the
mouth and secures the control Of tbs Mississippi
Why then should they not oppose the acquisition Of
Cubs, which simply commands the Gulff They Op.
posed the acquisition Of Florida and Texas-Tsxas
with her kindred blood and revolutionary memories
Why then should We expect them to favor the ao-
QUESTION of territory that can make no such ap