The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1880-10-30
The Candidates and the Tariff.

'Soiheu correspondent writes
W INFORM US that the Democrats in
ms heighberhood charge that Gen.
erai Garfield always votes in Con-
gres Tor free trade" and that he is "a
MEMBER of the Golden Club" and
asks for our opinion as to the tariff
issue In the campaign. The ques-
'iohs OF our correspondent cover a
good deal of ground, but we shall
answer them as briefly as possible.
II Is true that General Garfield was
elected an honorary member of the
organization in Englund known as
the Golden Cuba club of liberal
principles, and which holds as part
OF Its creed free trade" But Gen.
GARFIELD is not responsible for its
views, nor has he ever endorsed
them. The safe way of getting at
zen. Garheld's opinions is listening
TO what he says, and, better still, by
observing what he has done. In Con.
gress debates, and in the labors of
committees. his work, his influence,
MS oratory and his vote, have al.
ways been in favor of affording to
American industries such protection
as would enable them to maintain
themselves against the competitions
OF old world cheap labor. He thus
bisyors American manufacturers as
against foreign, and American wages
as against the pittance paid to labor
erS and artisans in the old world. In
Gen. Gartieid's letter accepting the
presidential nomination he wrote !:
'ln reference to our customs laws, a
policy should be pursued which will
bring revenues to the Treasury, and
will enable the labor and capital en-
ployed in our great industries to
compete fairly in our OWE markets
with the labor and capital of foreign
producers" In writing thus Gen.
Garfield planted himself on the Re-
publican platform, which declares
that "duties levied for the pun pose of
revenue should SO discriminate as to
favor American labor" La the re-
port made by Gen. Garfield on "the
hoops band and scroll iron duties, !"
ia May, 1SS0,and his powerful speech
on the dangerous Democratic Tariff
bill OF 1878, General Garfield shnvel
his mastery of the subject, and his
statesmanllke grasp of the needs of
American manufacture, and Ameri-
can labor and wages.
Turning from this clear and con.
sistent view of the Republican party
and lis candidate to the Democratic
party and its candidate, we find only
confusion of thought, astounding ig.
norance of facls, and yet a strange
hostility to the protection of Ameri-
can industry and to paying fair wa
ges to American labor. The "Wood
Tariff Bill" brought in by Demo.
cratic leader in a Democratic House
or Representatives, had it become
law, would have struck deadly
blow at American industry. 1t was
an effort to destroy protection and
establish tariff for revenue. When,
therefore, the Cincinnati Democratic
Convention by unanimous vote de-
clared in favor of a tariff for revenue
only, it was one point upon which
the Democracy were united, SO far as
they unite on anything. 1t agreed in
hostility to what they called "the
present 0illianoats tariff" Upon that
platform they placed General Han
cock. who accepted it as a part of
Democratic doctrine.
But like a clap of thunder came
the election in Indiana. Now, as
Indiana is rather producing than a
manufacturing State, it was the place
where "free trade" was supposed to
be strongest. Yet the Republican
victory showed that the common
sense and experience of the masses,
strengthened by observation of the
prosperity of the country under the
"present tariff" was opposed to free
trade. If opposed in agricultural
Indiana, how would the working.
men vote in manufacturing Csnnec~
ticut, New York and New Jersey ?
There was CONSERVATION in the
Democratic ranks that extended even
to their chief. Hancock lost his head,
and tried to crawfish out OF free
trade and as Hancock was not ac-
customed to get scared and crawfish,
he did it very awkwardly. His tariff
letter showed his utter ignorance OF
trade and protection as clearly as
Garfield's record had showed his
mastery of the business. 1t is nc
disgrace to a soldier that he does not
understand tariff; the only disgrace
belongs to the Democrats who put a
soldier in such an absurd position.
They went back on their principles
k.x