Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-12-02
THE TARIFF AND REVENUE
REFORMERS.
How the Two Parties VIII Stand i'm
- tine Next Cnn0rnS9.

How the Two Parties VIII stand i'm
the Next Congress-
The New York Post, Republican
journal, but a strong advocate of revenue
reform, argues that the ftprotectionists"
have been signslly defeated in the cleo
tons for the next United States House of
Representatives. As matter of general
interest to men of ell parties, we copy its
remarks and conclusions:
According to our count, the revenue re-
formers will have in the next House 122
votes, the protectioEists will have rs
votes, and there are 45 members
whose opinions we do not know well
enough to designate them. Of these,
however, it is probable that at least as
many will vote for revenue reform as for
protection. There is no doubt that the
House, when it divides on the question,
viii show handsome majority for reve-
nue. reform.
How has this been accomplished ?
Shortly after the Indiana election, in 0c-
tOber, Vice President Colfax made pub
lie what be believed to be the causes of
the defeat of the Republicans there. He
showed, by curious array of figures,
that the Republicans were beaten, first,
because many Republican voters stayed
away from the polls; second, because 'ft
was a positive year of political disaffec-
ton, of tickets splitting, as well as of not
voting tickets at all" As examples, he
showed that in seven districts Republican
candidates for the Legislature were
beaten, while the Republican State ticket
had majority in them all. 'SThe only
congressional district where, by Repubh-
can disaff7ction, Congressman was lost,
the Republican State ticket has major
ity."
Now ticket-splitting probably appears
to Mr.. Colfax the gravest of political
crimes; though to others it is one of the
best signs that the American citizen
thinks for himself, and is not mere ma
chine. 1t is the discrimination exercised
by voters, and mostly by Republican vo-
tiers, which has put majority of revenue
reformers into the next Congress. The
EUening Post during the summer faith
fully warned the Republican politicians
that if they wished success they must not
nominate monopolists, or land-grabbers,
or men of bad character; that their only
way to success was to take up civil serv-
ice and revenue reform, and nominate
their best men. The result has shown
the wisdom of this warning. In almost
every instance in which a civil service
and revenue reformer was nominated by
Al L., aIoofoI H. fba
people; but in a multitude of cases, where
they nominated protectionists and hack
| politicians, they were beaten.
We have before called attention to the
peoples verdict in the October elections
upon some of the monopolists. No less
than six of the Pennsylvanians who voted
to keep up the high price of salt, steel
and coal were rejected in caucus or at the
polls Dennis Mccarthy, Martin Welker
and Eliakim H. Moore were summarily
rejected by their party; Schenck, ONeill,
Morren, Donley, Cessna, Stewart, Arm
| strong, Glifllan, the most pronounced
monOpolists, were defeated at the polls in
districts which before uniformly support
ed their party; in several districts where
revenue Ieformers had been nominated
for example, the first, second, seventh
and fourteenth of Ohio-handsOme gains
were made.
The November elections present similar
results.
10 the first Alabama district Buck, one
! of the most intense monOpolists, is left at
home, and Norris, another, is defeated by
a Democrat in the third district. In the
sixth Michigan district, Strickland, who
has voted for every scheme of the mon
OpOlists, was defeated in the convention
| by briggs, who was in turn defeated at
the polls by revenue reform Democrat.
The devotion of Gen. Paine to monopoly
has given the first Wisconsin district to
the Democrats, who elected Alexander
Mitchell, q goodman, by over four thou
sand majority. The first Virginia district
has been lost in the same way. Brown
and HOge were defeated in South Caro-
lima. No less than five pronounced pro-
tectiOnists lost their districts in Tennes-
see, while Butler and Maynard were
nominated and elected, with greatly re-
duced majOrites, only by the corrupt use
of power in two Of the strongest Repub-
liCan districts in the country.
OF special significance was the result in
Arkansas and West Virginia. The first
and third districts of Arkansas are repre-
scented by Roots and Boles, two of the
worst monOpolists in the House; they have
both been defeated, the former by ma
joTity of nearly seven thousand. On the
contrary, in the second district of Arkan-
sss the Republicans nominated a liberal
man, and the people elected him, although
the district gave a large Democratic ma
jOrity In 1868.
West Virginia is now represented by
three mOnopolists, who were elected by
large maJOrities. In the next Congress
the first and third districts will be repre-
sented by Democrats, while McGrew' s ma
jOrity in the second district is reduced
from 1880 to less than one thousand.
In the eighth Illinois district direct
issue was made on the tariff, and the
Democratic candidate, James G. Robin
son, spoke in almost every town in favor
of revenue reform. He overcame the
very large Republican majority of two
years ago, and was elected on that ques-
ton. On the other hand, the Republicans
of the second Minnesota district gained a
member of Congress by placing Gen.
AVerill on q straight revenue reform plat
fOIm.
Throughout the whole list of Congress-
men we can only discover two mOnopo-
list gains-that of H. E. Havens in the
fourth district, and that of Charles B.
Farwell, member of the Chicago city
ring, who supersedeS Mr.. Judd in the
| first Illinois district, while the monOpo-
lists losses number more than forty. For
in addition to those already enumerated,
in many districts where there was likely
to be a contest the Republicans were
wise enough to take new men. In this
way Congress has got rid of Ferris,
Knapp, Latin, Churchill, Kelsey, HOtch-
kiss, Fisher and Sheldon in this State,
who all voted for almost every measure
of protection.
The result of the canvass, aside from
the victory of revenue reform and civil
service, is that the Republicans have lost
thirty districts which they carried two
years ago. Had the party everywhere
done as it did in Missouri-had it boldly
| placed itself on the platform of civil
service ana revenue fe1Orm-t would not
be mortified by these losses.
OF the one hundred and forty-three
members who will vote for revenue re-
form, about sixty will be Republicans.
These will no doubt control the organiza-
ton of the House; for, while the sblest
and most aggressive among the monopc-
lists have been left at home, the revenue
reformers have increased their force in
| ability as well as in numbers. Freeman
Clarke, of this State; Samuel Shellabar-
ger, James Monroe and Aaron F. Perry,
of Ohio; James NJ. Wilson, of Indiana;
Henry Waldron, of Michigan, and other
new members, will materially add to the
efficient force of revenue reformers who
are now in Congress and have been re-
| elected.