Maryland independent. [volume] (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1874-current, 1881-02-04
~ Law
~
~ < \
~
9nlrpeNlGnt,
PORT TOBACCO. ND.
Friday, Feb.e..........4th, 1881
CONGRESS AND THE TARIFF.

fcldfiOns WHICH a Istthpti dito kSH-
should bear towards the tariff aus ion
And the members coul1 not d. better
than take a brief glance at Tho hjstor
and record of the party on this gu. ION
within the last few year. TIeqa -'ions
involved are not dead oncs bat must b.
brought prom nently to the front ere
long, and our Democratic Congress could
not more profitable spcn tao few days
yet left of the session BY thus instruct
ing themselves. Many of them seem to
think revenue reform, OF Free Trade, is a
dcfunct issue-a thing of thc past, aud
that the future of the country N ire
deemably committed to tie policy Of
protection.
The Democratic National Convention
proclaimed in 1886 that no more revenue
should be raised by duties than IS re-
qured to pay the necessary expenses Of
the Government In 1869 aud in 1861
the Democracy were dumb about the
tariff In 1868 tue platform demanded
"a tariff Cor revenue upon foreign inn
ports" aud sueh equal taxation under
che Internal revenue laws as will ofTord
incidental protection 10 domestic manu-
features, aud as will without impairing
the revenue impose the least burden upon
and next best promote and encourage
the industrial interests of the county.
In 1872 the Democratic Convention,
having nominated Horace t'reeley and
recognizing irreconcilable difference
about free trade and protection, re-
mitted the discussion of the subject to
thepeople in their Congressionaldis;rict
and to the decision of Congress thereon,
wholly free of Executive interference or
direction"
In 1876 the platform approyen by
MIR. Tiden insisted that-all custom
house taxation shall be only for revenuo."
That insistance was repeated at Gin
einnati in 1880 In the State Of New
York, and after the Greeley iasco of
1872, the Democratic State Convention,
having partially recovered from tire lun-
acy of 1872, boldly threw aside the pro
t.ction" mask and unfurlcd the Demo
cratic banner of Hard Money, Free
Trade and Home Rule" which led up to
.he victories of 1874
Thus much for The Democratic past.
Now what of the Democratic future
Certainly the Democratic leaders in Con-
grcsS need not wait for Mr.. f lton's COM
mission to say whether Congress has the
constitutional right AMI power to levy
duties only for protection Even
General Garfield imtimatcd in his letter
Of acceptance that Congress has that
right and power A great many voters
are just now thinking if not saying that
there is no continuity of loctrine between
the Democracy of fifty or twenty years
ago and the Democracy of 1880 From
another quarter at the same time we
hear a great deal about new organiza-
ton of the Democracy under better and
more unsclfsA leaders. But would it
not be well for Democrats to give now
and then a thought to the doctrines of
party, the promotion AMI application of
which by voters constitute the only valid
reason why one who is not an ofice-seeke
need trouble himself about organizing
and perfecting Democratic machinery of
any kind.
GA the committee appointed by the
last Democratic National Convention to
prepare a. resolution the tariff ques
.iSr. and ON sshsv- questions wns Nir.
David A. Wells, who is justly looked
upon III Europe, as we'll as in Amerca, as
the best informed among the American
political economists who insist that pro-
teetive tariff cannot and does not protect
in the United States, aud that the only
excuse in this country for custom house
taxation is the need Of revenue. Mr..
Wells demanded at Cincinnati "a tariff
for revenue only" and the convention
responded to his demanl Do the Dem
Ocrats in Congress intend to repudiate.
or, what is much the same thing, 10 re-
fuse to legislate in the direction pointed
out by the convention which nominated
Gen. Hancock? Mr.. Wells drew the res
Olution which the Democratic Convention
adopted, aud which, of course, he ex-
planned to the leading mon ofthe con
vention. lie has told the country what
the details are of Il tariff for revenue on
ly." Do the Democrats in Congress in
tend to formulate those details into
bill and send the bill to President HAYES
for his official s;gnatu-e2 Or do the
Democrats in Congress intend to dawde
or keep silent and permit General Gar
field and his Republican friends to pre-
pare and enact measure Of tariff reform
which the Democracy must either APP
prove and adopt, or else fall back in res
pect to it into the ranks of President
Gar6elds opposition ?
With one aspect of the tariff business
everybody, whether free trader or pro-
tectionist, will agree that the present