New-York tribune., 1883-12-21
THE DEuOcB1TJC CYCLE.

The effort of the Democratic party TO find out
what its views are upon the tariff has become
fairly pitiable. So long as it was supposed that
Mr.. Randall would be nominated for Speaker
the average Democratic politician was exceed
ingly reticcnt upon the subject He then be-
lievcd himself 10 be opposed to n revision Of
the tariff and in favor of Il general suppression
of the subject until after the Presidential cleo
ton. When Mr.. Carlisle was nominated the
average Democrat at once concluded that
"IIonesty was the best policy after ALL" un-
covered his real opinions, and announced him
self in favor of an immediate revision of the
tariff, with incidental destruction to Protection
and all its works. This continued fOrty-cight
hours. At the end of that time Mr.. Carlisle
made his speech, in which he assured the c0un-
try that there need be no alarm, and that there
would be no sudden and radical changes. This
threw the Democratic House, and the party
and the Democratic press into complete con-
fusion. Having been in favor of no revision,
and then of sweeping revision, they didn't know
when they heard Mr.. Carlise's speech, and they
don't know now, what they are in favor of.
They won't know until Speaker Carlisle has
announced his committees, and the chances are
that they won't know then, because the com
mitteemen themselves are probably no better
OFF than the rest of the party. This is one of
the misfortuncs incident to having no opinions
which the party is not willing TO sacrifice in
order TO carry the next election.
BY way of trying to help the party TO find out
where it stands The Philadelphia Times has
been printing all the Democratic platforms on
this subject last adopted in the various States.
A. M. no arin
heads of "Protection," "Frce Trade" and
Neutral they make an interesting but con-
fusing collection, which it is hard to believe
emanacd from single political party. All OF
the debatable States, except New-IOrk, favor
a discriminating revenue tariff with incidental
protection. These include Ohio, Virginia, Penn
sylyania, and New-Jerscy, which adopted the
famous Ohio straddlej North Carolina, which
lin 1882 demanded the entire abolition of the
Internal Revenue system, and Connecticut, In
diana and New Hampshire, which In the same
year demanded a revision of the tariff so as to
produce sufficient revenue and give incidental
protection without fostering monopOlies."
New York, as every one will remember, found
it impossible to reconcile conflicting opinions,
and so said nothing whatever about the
tariff this year. The last Democratic
platforms in Texas and the far Western
States-including Michigan, Minnesota, Ne
braska, Iowa, Kansas and OregOn-which
touched upon the tariff at all, were radical
in their Free Trade demands, denOunciDg the
tariff in sweeping terms, and, in the case of Hi
nois and Nebraska, denying the right of tho
Government, under the Constitution, to levy
taxes for the purposes Of Protection. The Times
classes Kentucky in this Free Trade belt, and
it doubtless belongs therej but the fact is that
the resolution on that subject lodged it so cf-
fectually that Kentucky Democrats themselves
are not quito sure to this day whether it refers
to State or National taxation. Then we have
"neutral" list, consisting, besides New York,
of Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts and Della
ware, which in general terms are in favor of
low taxes, but did not touch upon the subject
of Protection. Few of the Southern States are
represented in this showing, because most of
their campaigns have been on local issues.
If any generalization can be made from this
kaleidoscope array of principles" it is that, as
q rule, In the States where the Democratic party
is hopelessly in the minority or surely in the
majority it frankly avows its Free Trade views,
because it knows that 1t has nothing to lose
while In the doubtful States 1t trims its sails
with phrases about Protection In the hope of
avoiding defeat. The men who will have to
frame the Democratic National platform OF
next year so as to cover all these conflicting
ideas are entitled to public sympathy. Mean
time, the openness with which Democratic
newspapers debate as to the principles which
they ought to profess in order to carry the next
election must amuse intelligent voters.