Morning journal and courier., 1880-10-23

dwinding, not yearly rising, revenue. It has impoverished many industries to subsi- d1ze few. It prohibits imports that might purchase the products of American labor. It
 has degraded American commerce from the first to an inferior rank on the high seas. It has cut down the sales of American manufac- lures at home and abroad and depleted the returns of American agriculture-an industry followed by half our people. It costs the people five times more than 1t produces to the treasury, obstructs the processes of pro- duction and wastes the fruits of labor. It promotes fraud, fosters smuggling, enriches dishonest officials and bankrupts honest mer- chants. We demand that all custom house taxation shall be only for revenue. Now, remarks MT. Watterson, this resolu- tion had either to be reafirmed or rescinded. Unfortunately" he continues, neither Mir. Watterson nor the gentlemen who were asso-
 ciated with him in the unpardonable blunder of reasserting Democratic doctrine as old and trite as the moral law, possessed in June the luminous hind-sight which makes Mir Shank lin's words so peculiar in October" /" MT. Watterson is clearly right in his un-
 derstanding of the policy and traditions of his party on this subject. In 1856, the last time before the war that the Democracy met as united party in national convention, the following resolution was adopted at Gin cinnati:
 Resolved That there questions connected with
 the foreign policy of this country which inferior
 for the people of the United States declare
 themselves in favor of free and progressive free
 trade throughout the world, by solemn manifesto
 tions to place their moral influence at the side of
 their successful example.
 This was reafirmed in both the Baltimore
 and Charleston platforms of 1860, and when the southern and most influential portion of the party seeded in 1861 they placed in the
 Constitution of the Confederacy the follow ing:
 Article l, Section s: Nor shall any duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations be laid to promote or toste' G1ay br0aach of i1a daIst7y.
 What the party has done in Congress since it came into power is clearly summarized in the following:
 In the first Congress in which the Demo- crats had control of the House. what was known as the Morrison tariff bill-thorough- ly anti-protective in principle and aim-was introduced and received the nearly solid sup port of the Democratic majority but Re publican Senate and executive stood in the way and it was not pressed to vote.
 On the 25th of May, 1876, Mir. Charles H. Adams, Republican, of New York; introduced in the House the following preamble and res olution:
 WHEREAS It is apparent that all branches of manl1- featuring mechanical and mining pursuits are at this tends to embarrassment by the unsettling of values or the rendering of manufacturing, mechanical or mining operations uncertain is unwise therefore,
 ResoiUed, That in the judgment of this House egis Iaton affecting the tariff is at this time inexpeent
 On a vote 12O members opposed this reso- lution and 94 favored it, the question being accepted as a trial of strength between the friends and enemies of protection. Of the 12O who voted against the resolution 114 were Democrats and only were Republi- cans. Of the 94 who voted for 1t v were Republicans and only r Democrats. So this salutary resolution was defeated by Demo- cratic votes.
 On December 1. 1877, Mir Mills, Democrat, of Texas, offered resolution ''to so revise the tariff as to make it purely and solely tariff for revenue" On this proposition the vote stood: Yeas-6O Democrats and Repub- icans. Noes-54 Republicans and 12 Demo crats.
 The first test vote on the 'sWood tariff bill' of 1878 (which anti protective measure) occurred on March 26 of that year. Then Mir. Wood moved that the bill be con- sidered from day to day until completed. On this motion 122 Democrats and 15 Republi- cans voted for considering the bill and 104 Republicans and 10 Democrats against it.
  fected, !" during stubborn contest of several weeks. Finally @ motion was made June ,, 1878, Ito strike out the enaeting clause,'' which is a parliamentary form of killing a bill. For this motion 115 Republicans and 19 Democrats voted, while it was opposed by IA Democrats and 6 Republicans. Thus this attack on the protective tariff was finally defeated by Republican votes
 On January 12, 1880, William H. Hatch, Democrat, of Missouri, moved to suspend the rules and pass the following bill:
 Be it enacted, That duty be levied collected, directly or indirectly on the mpSrtstion of of salt fine or coarse in bulk in bags sacks barrels or other packages may be imported free of duty.
 This motion was supported by 1O6 Demo- crats and Nationals and only Republicans, while it was voted against by 102 Republi- cans and but IA Democrats and Nationals. Thus this measure was defeated by the Re publicans.
 On March 8, 1880, William J. Sanford, Democrat of Alabama, offered a bill to re- duce the tariff 50 per cent on merchandise composed in principal part of metal (iron, copper etc, ) wood, wool, etc., and moved to | refer it to the committee Ion the revision of the laws" From that committee the friends of the bill were confident of 8 favorable re- port, while 1t was certain that 1t would not l be reported back, if it WAS referred to the Committee of Ways and Means. clear is- | 5uO Wao I1uo AAduC up d sObC tdhOI 1hO i members who were opposed to the 50 per cent, reduction of the tariff (1o4 Republicans and 34 Democrats) voted "aye'' to send the | bill to the Committee of Ways and Means. | The eighty-six Democrats and one Repubi- can who favored the 90 per cent. reduction | voted mo, " and again Republican votes de 1 feated an anti-protective motion.
 And in the speech presenting his bill to the House. Fernando Wood, chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, said of it's aims:
 The bill reported affects them, so far as l the rates of duties are concerned, but little. l It's reductions are triiing as compared to what | they should be, and in my opinion they could | well afford to bear. If I had the power to 1 commence de novo I SHOULD REDUCE l THE DUTIES FIFTY PER CENT. instead | of less than fifteen per cent. upon an average | as now proposed.
 The party with this record is now begging | the votes of workmen in protected indus | tries and claiming that it has not been and is not opposed to their interests. It would win more respect if not more votes by display |