The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1880-10-28
FOR VICE PRESIDENT,
CHESTER A. ARTHUR,
OF NEW YORK.
The Eaton Bill and the Real Ques-
ton.

/ u0 GdGOu Dill duO UQo Real (yuoS-
ton.
The Democratic party through its repre-
sentatives at Cincinnati declared for tar
if for revenue only. 1t has been taken at
its word, and it now asks to be disbelieved;
and wonders, not unreasonably we must
confess, how people can persist in receiving
any of its declarations as sincere. It says
it never was for free trade; it asserts with
much vehemence that the sole object of its
being is the promotion and protection of
American industries; and it is willing and
even anxious to take its oath upon stack
of Bibles higher than Gilroy's kite, that the
Democratic party was organized for the ex.
press purpose of combating and killing the
pernicious and never to be sufficiently con
demned fallacy of free-trade. The Argus,
which considered Mr.. Randall few years
ago as a bad nan because he was protec-
zionist, and said he ought not to be chosen
speaker OF the House of Representatives,
and argued in favor of his competitor,
that ayowed free trader and honest and es-
timable man, Michael Kerr, now comes out
fat-footed for protection, and is ready to
put forth prospectus declaring that it was
started in 1903 as high tariff organ and
has steadily advocated high tariff ever
since.
But though a protectionist organ and
ready to fight for that economic doctrine to
extremity, the Argus processes to believe
that the question between free-trade and
protection does not enter into this political
campaign, and that the only issue between
the two parties is whether or not Senator
Eaton's bill for the appointment of COM
mission to investigate the workings of
ourrevenue and customs laws shall be passed.
In making this profession the Argus is most
disingenuous and seeks to avoid the real
issue. That bill has passed the Senate and
by the aid of Republican votes. That it is
not law is the fault of the Democratic
House. The bill is agreeable to Republi-
cans because they believe that the investi-
CATION proposed will prove beyond all ques-
uon that the maintenance and enlarge
ment OF our manufacturing interests and
the welfare of American artisans depend
upon protective tariff.
The Eaton bill is not in question. The
issue is not between those who hold that
the tariff TOW existing is faulty and makes
unjust Determinations, and those who hold
it to be an entirely just and wise method of
taxation: but between those who favor
reveoue tariff and those who favor a
protective tariff. The Cincinnati Con-
vention had nothing to say about
the Eaton bill, had no complaint
to make of inequalities or injustices
of the tariff. Its sole quarrel was with the
principle of protection, and the only thing
it had to say about the matter was it's terse
declaration for ''a tariff for revenue onlg.''
The Chicago Convention, ON the other hand,
insisted that the tariff should be framed and
executed in the interest and for the protec-
ton of American industry. Such was the
issue made by the two parties in their Ma
tional Conventions. Such is the question
upon which the people are called to vote
next Tuesday. Democratic triumph means
a revenue tariff, Republican triumph a pro
tective tariff.