The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1880-09-18

the platform being rather vague. No
pledge is given to destroy the national
banks if the Democrats get the power,
although such eminent Democratic lead
ers as Thurman, Ewing, and Voorhees,
have been telling the people of the West
for the past two years that the banks are
hostile to their interests, and that the
Democratic party means to abolish them.
\ number of things are said in the plat
form with an impressive show Of posi-
which both parties are agreed. The gen
eral purpose of the document appears to
be to avoid the discussion of important
national issues upon which the DemOc-
racy has made record of late, and de-
pend for success upon the admirable mill
tary history of General Hancock and his
want of known political opinions.
Upon two questions, however, the
Democrats have departed from their non
committal policy. The platform de-
mands free ships and tariff for revenue
only. Here the Republicans can join
issue with them squarely. Free ships
however desirable in theoretical sense
mean practically the entire abandonment
of American ship yards. The Italians
and the Norwesians can put together
wooden ships cheaper than our Maine
shipwrights can build them, and the
great Clyde-side and Tyne-side yards of
Great Britain can underbid our Della
ware yards for the construction of iron
vessels. The ruin of our ship-building
industry might be compensated for by
| commercial advantages iii time of peace,
| but we should be seriously crippled in
case of war, for our navy yards are not
capable of supplying our navy with the
additional armed vessels it would need,
to say nothing of the fleets Of transports
that must be rapidly improvised for mill
tary operations. Leaving the CONNER
cial question aside altogether, the sup
port of American ship yards by protec-
| tive legislation is defensive measure Of
the highest national importance. The
Democrats have made no point here that
| will help them in the canvass. Indeed,
| in view of the closenesS of the State Of
Maine and their hopes of carrying it by
their alliance with the Greenbackers, it
looks as though they had committed a
serious blunder.
They have succeeded no better with
their "tariff for revenue only" plank.
| Such a tariff means the entire abandon
ment of the American system of protec-
ton under which our multiform manu-
featuring industries have grown and pros
pered. A tariff for revenue is tariff
which will produce the most revenue,
and is Of necessity low tariff that will
stimulate large importations of foreign
goods to undersell our own products in
our home markets. This plank arrays
against the Democracy the entire manu-
featuring interest of the country, to-
gether with the large body of artisans
and laborers whose daily bread depends
| upon its prosperity. 1t throws away the
very chances the Democrats had of car
rying Connecticut and New Jersey, and
the possibility of their securing Pennsyl-
vania, the home State of their candidate.
| Besides, it will lose them many votes in
New York, where there are thousands of
industries which would be ruined by the
repeal of protective duties. In return,
the Democrats gain nothing. The South,
which is the only section of the country
where free trade ideas largely predomi-
nate, is solidly Democratic in every case.
The West is Republican, and will not
change it's political faith Oh account of
this bid for it's favor. The East, where
the pivotal States of New York, Connec-
ticut, and New Jersey are to be the bat
| tie field of the Presidential contest, is
firmly welded to the protective system
by a thousand motives of self-interest.
Thus the Democratic assault upon pro-
lection can only be regarded as u gigan-
tic blunder.
1t is to be regretted that the Demo-
| ton and platform, to identify their can
| vass clearly with 4 few broad principles
of legislation, administration, or consti-
tutional Interpretation. A thorough dis
cussion of the fundamental ideas of our
government, as far as they concern the
| powers of national and state authority,
would have been exceedingly valuable in
it's educational influence upon large mass
| es of voters who have never been led to
serious consideration of the questions
involved The traditions of the Demo-
cratic party lead it to take the side of
State authority as against the Federal
power: those of the Republican party
lead it to favor the extension and strength
ening of the National authority at the
expense. of the State governments. A
contest ON this ground would have in
volved the revival of the early discus
sions between the Federalists and the
ti-Federalists and close study of the
opinions of the fathers of the Republic,
and would have lifted the campaign to a
high ground of craftsmanship. The
Democrats. it is true, would have been
somewhat at loss to reconcile the the
DRY of their party with its practice when
in power. jefferson, the great advocate
of the States rights and loose govern
ment theory, made an exceedingly vigor-
GUS administration when he got to be
President, and was as much disposed as
his Federalist predecessors, Washington
and Adams, to make the most of the
powers given him by the Constitution
Jackson, when he wanted to destroy the
United States Bank and when he threat
ened to hang the South Carolina multi
fiers, was as stalwart Il I" strong govern
ment" man as was Grant in later yeaes
Pierce and Buchanan, in their efforts to
fasten slavery upon Kansas against the
will of her people, stretched to the ut
most all former broad interpretations of
the Constitution. AS Il rule, the party
in power takes liberal views of the ex-
tent of Federal authority, and the party
out of power makes use of the rights of
the States to combat it's successful rival.
Nevertheless, so far as professed princi-
pies are concerned. the Democrats can
claim to be the party of the States and
the Republicans can claim to be that of