Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1883-09-04
Communicated.

Editor Spirit of Jefferson;
t" Young Democrat" in your issue
of 21st ult., seems disposed to crit
icise the tariff plank in the platforms
of the Ohio and Virginia State Dem
ocratic Conventions. He {" Young
Dcmocrat) finds this plank 'full of
Inconsistencies and imcOnlp dti6ilities. -
{" Young Democrat may be per-
son of profound rcseach and most ex-
ccllcnt judgment, and if he is right
in this instance, the party of which
he claims to be a member, has been a
party of inconsistencies" from its
birth, because this very plank rep
resents the true position of the De
mocracy from it's creation to the
present time. Thomas jefferson and
Andrew jackson must have been in
consistent men, because they orig
mated this system, it is their doctrine,
word for word.
q Young Democrat regards this
plank as but a lengthening, a contin-
uation of the sentence tariff for rev.
cnue only. How thoroughly he mis-
understands the question. Instead
of one sentence being continuation
of another, the two arc in direct an
tOgonism. tried to make this plain
in my article of 18th ult. a tariff
for revenue only was the work of an
enthusiast, a dreamer, and was carved
by the Cincinnati Convention in the
excitement of the moment, without
thought or care as to it's true mean
ing, while the plank in controversy is
the work of the wiscst Statesmen of
Ohio. calmly and thoughtfully con-
sidered, and has been endorsed by the
leading men of Virginia, Pennsyl-
vania and little Massachusetts.
Free Trade, 1 presume, means that
the Federal Government shall be sup
ported by direct taxation. This the
great mass of people do not want,
besides it would be impossible unless
every foreign country that we trade
with would adopt similar laws. There
must be reciprocity of action. This
being the case, the conclusion natur-
ally follows that the government must
be supported by certain duties levied
on imports. The question arises,
what articles shall be subjects of
duties? Shall it be on articles of nom
production of our country? It could
be on none other if tariff for rev.
enuc only was the law. Or, shall it
be on articles that compete with home
production, and thereby encourage
home industry and labor, rs is con-
templated by the tariff plank that
" Young Democrat finds so many
faults with. Oh, yes! home produc-
tive interest can be encouraged and
labor justly compensated without
creating monopolics. will give you
one instance, Mr.. Y. d. Wool can
be produced on cheaper scale in
Australia than in the United States.
Now a slight duty on all imported
wool enables our farmers to compete
successfully with all foreign wool that
reaches our market. And to the con-
trary, woOl-growing is not remunera-
tive unless protected by this duty
For instance, prior to the tariff act of
1867, the annual wool production of
the country was but little over sixty
pounds. Under the encourage
ment given to it the production of 1880
exceeded two hundred and thirty-livc
million pounds. Did not this cncour-
age home industry and labor, without
creating monopOlics? Nor did it take
money out of one mans pocket to put
it in anothcr's. The price of the wool
was reduced to the consumer, one class
benefited and no one injured.
No, Mr.. Young Democrat
platform of the principles of the Dem
ocratic party will not answer for that
of the Republican party, by simply
changing its title. You must either
change your ideas or change your
name. LITTLE MASSACHUSETTS,