The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-05-26
~, = Tariff Question.

After quoting from the Dispatch iine
s,atInU that In our opinion the Democrats
Of Virginia ought not 10 make the tariii a
test question. the Norfolk Ledger comments
az follows:
"If the Democratic party OF Virginia IS
10 abandon the revenue tariff a. an issue IN
the congressional canvass, when does our
respected contemporary expect congress
10 effect The reforms so much noeded IN inc
nresent inio,itous system OF protection Tor
nro,ootionY II the question Is lodged by
orr people at home, how can we expect
orr representatives at Washington 10 90
What their constituents were afraid TO do!
The advice Of the Dispatch is, in our opin-
ion. injudicious. Whatever reforms are
needed. whatever measures we wish advo-
Gated. should be freely and fully discussed
before the people, and when TINS l. done
the Democrats in Congress VIII not scatter
when questions are 10 he voted on IN tho
rough accord with Democratic theories
and Democratic practices"
Perhaps we do not understand the
Ledqer'S position; but it seems to us to be
our good friends desire to do what we
think ought not to be done-namey' 10
make a test question OF the tariff. In
word. we understand the Ledger to be In
favor Of making the tariff the dividing line
between the Democrats and the Republic
cans or ReRdjuslors Of Virginia. The adj
yocstes Of a tariff for protection must vote
the Republican ticket, and the opponents
of such tariff must vote the Democratic
ticket. Stated otherwise, the Ledger would
turn over TO the RcadiuStcrs all the pro
teciionists in this State. What would foi-
low: All the manufacturing towns and
cities would ut once become Readjuster
strongholds. Even the city OF Richmond,
where the Readiusters are so few in num-
bcrs that they did not run yesterday any
candidates for the city offices, would he
converted into a Republican or Readiusier
headquarters. Right or wrong, thousands
OF our workingmen are protcctionistS, and
ii compelled to divide upon The question
Of a tariff for protection would Of course
range themselves on their own side Of that
question.
IL is Of no use 10 tell men who have TO
work for two or three dollars day that the
tariff robs them; because they know that
they spend nearly all Of their small wages
for house-rent, beef, bacon, lard, flour,
meal, and vegetables.
An Alabama gentleman recently said TO a
CORES ondent OF the New Orleans Times:
Theoretically ] am Il free-trader, but
practically am 4 protectionist. ] endorse
the theoretical souudncSS OF the Demo
cratic doctrine OF a tariff for revenue
only; but at the same time | am con-
WINGED that any considerable cutting down
Of the tariff now would rCtard the pros
perity which is everywhere setting in
throughout this section. don't want TO
experiment with our 'infant industries
Our iron enterprises are booming. Cotton
manufacturing is on the increase. / am
willing TO let well enough alone-fOr the
present at least
However, we do not intend at thi, time
10 advocate tariff for protection. We are
striving to prevent the Democratic party
from being divided upon that question.
The Ledger will claim that it is as much
opposed to such q division as we are; but
We think il will find it difficult to explain
how its proposition to make protection an
issue can be carried ont without disrupting
the Democratic party.