The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1872-04-25
The Cincinnati Movement.

The great meeting at the Cooper Institute,
besides its value as strong popular delnon-
stration. is worth more than all the declara-
tions that preceded it in the light 1t throws on
the spirit and aims of the Cincinnati movement
Just as the living, vital creed OF cnurcn Is
better seen in the current sermons OF lts aposr
ties and teachers than in its formal areicies oi
faith, so the real meaning and anlmaung sPlrlt
of political movement may be more truly es-
timated by the topics chiefly dwet on IN popu-
lar meetings than by the dry enunclatlons put
forth as platforms. We attach comparatively
little IMPORTANCE to the statement of principles
nut forth in the Missouri call and echoed with
feebler emphasis in the New York Endorsement,
because such declarations do not show ON what
points the chief stress is laid, and on which the
life and yigor of the movement depend: There
is nothing like great popular meeting, ad-
dressed by accredited leaders, for putting the
parts of a platform in due perspective, and
showing which are heart, and lungs, and stom,
ach. and brain, and which mere beard and
f1ger-nails. -.
Thus far, our best means of estimating the
vital tendencies of the Cincinnati movement
are the speeches of MIR. Trumbull and Mr.
Schurz in connection with the lndorslng PAU
dts of their immense audience. 1t Is easy 10
discover where the heart OF sincere pubhc
speaker lies. The topics to which he gives
most space and on which he chiefly dwells, the
topics on which he accumulates facts and ID
most fertile in illustrations, are those which he
is most anxious to impress upon the minds of
his hearers. And the views and temper OF the
audience are easily discovered by observing
what they receive with tame assent, and what
thew indorse with warm demonstrations OF ap-
plause. :
We scarcely need say that the emphasis OF
the Cooper Institute meeting was not IN al
eases nut where ace would have bestowed it. In
Mr.. Trumbull's speech, free trade did not re-
ceive>even the cold tribute of passing recog-
milton. Mr.. Schurz to be sure, stood by the
-free.trade colors, but with such brevity, and IN
language so restrained and pointless, as to al
ford little ground for hoping that the Cincln-
natl Convention will be a trade demonstra-
tion. And, what is still more discouraging,
this part of his speech did not evoke single
cheer, whereas the heartiest greetings and wild
est applause of the meeting were given to Hor,
ace Greeley, the chief apostle. of an effete and
absurd political economy. AS this was Re
publican meeting, we have perhaps no title to
Complain: but so distasteful fact cannot es-
cane our observation. 1t is too manifest that
It Is in other reforms than free trade that we
must look for substantial aid from Cincinnati.
Bat let the Cincinnati Convention do what it
NAV. we shall not cease to battle for free trade,
and no support we may finally give to the
movement will prevent our carrying the war
against protection into every Congressional
District, aud insisting on the nomlnaaon ana
election of free-trade members
OF, course, we do not dispute that, in the
present conjuncture there are some questions
which outrank strictly tariff issue. The tariff
controversy has been an active element In our
politics for nearly fifty years; and in all the
fluctuations in the rates of duties in that long
period, no President in Office has ever exerted
a controlling influence either for protection or
against it. Even John Tyler signed the high
protective tariff of 1912, and no other Prcsi-
dent ever vetoed revenue bill of any sort or
description. Tyler,s to be sure, vetoed pre-
ceding tariff bill; but on the ground that that
particular bill was legislative Jumble, COM
bining an appropriation bill and revenue bill
in the same act, by giving away the proceeds
of the sales of public lands When Congress
substituted protective tariff pure and simple,
he did not scruple to sign it, as all Presidents
have signed all purely revenue bills. 1t there
fore makes no real difference on what sort of
revenue platform President may be elected;
he is certain to accept whatever Congress
chooses to enact on this class Of subjects. The
free-trade battle must, now as heretofore, be
fought in the separate Congressional Districts.
It would be, absurd to miss the chance of other
great reforms in Presidential election for the
sake of Haunting the free-trade banner in
field where that question cannot be decided.
But what does the Cincinnati movement
offer as an equivalent in relation to the reve-
nue.? For an answer to this question we go to
Mr.. Trumbull's speech. He showed that the
present annual cost of the government aside
from the public debt and pensions is 0,OOO,-
600, whereas in 1860 it was less than sec, O,0O0,-
600, although the salaries of the public officers
remain pretty much the same as previous to the
war. MIR. Trumbull affirmed that with a liber-
al allowance for growth of population and in
crease of necessary expenses, the very utmost
the government ought to cost at present is
within the limit of S90,OOOOOO. This would
be clear saving of $4,000 600 year in the
public expenses, and corresponding reiie1 10
the taxpayers. Now this reform, if accom-
nlished, would be of more value than any mod
ifcations of ,ne tariff which can reasonably be
expected within the ensuing two years. An
abatement of fifty millions in the expenses of
the government would necessarily be followed
by corresponding diminution of taxes, and
lowering of the rates of customs duties among
the rest. At all events, it is better to get this
than to get nothing, as we should if Grant is
re- e.electcd with a subservient Congress. To re-
trench expenses is the surcst road to reduc-
ton of taxes
" On other points, we would lay the emphasis
precisely where it was put by the eminent
speakers at the late meeting and their applaud
ing auditors. There was nc point ON which
they expressed themselves with more vigor
than the necessity of restoring the supremacy
Of the Constitution, and enforcing obedience to
the laws ON the part Of the President and other
public officers. Both Mr. Trumbnll and MIR.
Scburz enforced this necessity by copious ci-
tation of instances of the lawlessness Of the
present Executive Mr.. Schurz showed that
in the Santo Domingo scheme the President.
usurped the war power without the sanction of
Congress, and in plain defiance of the Consti-
tuition. Mr.. Trumbull cited numerous cases
in which positive requirements of law have
been openly violated by this administration;