The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-06-06
Another Word.

read into oar articles what those articles
did not contain. We quote hereinafter
specimen Of this sort OF injustice from the
winchester Times-a paper that wou'd
no, intentionally wrong anybody. we IN
Ter that the Times Is in favor OF the
MonRIsoy tariffs, in word, In
favor of a tariff for revenue only
and when we denounce the men
who would make that sort OF tarin
AN issue In the presidential campaign,
reads into our article a denunciation OF
that sort OF tariff. We beg the Times to
do us Justice, aud not to misapply our
words. We do not call WATTERsoN
lunaiic because he advocates tarln TOT
revenue only. We don't care button
what sort OF tariff he advocates. We 90
NOT pronounce HURD and MORRISON mere
doctrinaires because those gentlemen FAVOR
that sort of tariff. We are perfectly will
ing that they should favor tariff OF
that sort. But we do both these
things because wArrERseS, MoRRIsos, and
UuEp insist upon reading us and all other
Democrats who do not favor tariff OF that
sor: ont OF the Democratic party; because
they say day after day that the Chicago
Convention will and ought 10 declare Tor
tariff for revenue only. We would not
open cur mouth on the subject If II were
not thus proposed TO pronounce unsound
and undemocratic the platforms adopted
by the Democratic State Conventions oil
Ohio. Virginia, West Virginia, New Jer-
sew. PENNSYLVANIA, and North Carolina.
The Times in the following paragraph
claims credit for a sin OF omission. III
says
.'Many Democratic papers, like The
Times. IN favor Of revenue refoIm, have
held their peace out OF consideration lor
party unity. Ii is only fair and right that
high-tariff papers, like the Dispatch, should
do likewise.
III the Dispatch is really opposed to
AUTHORIZATION, il should cease being an
agitator. Ii il really wishes quiet on the
tariff question, it should cease its clam
orous iteration OF the glories OF protec-
ton"
But that is just what the Times ought
not 10 have done. When it reads the crazy
utterances of the cranks who attack the
Virginia platform. it ought to stand by the
Democrats OF this State. 1t ought to let it
be known that il is opposed to making
tariff for revenue only an issue in the presi-
dental campaign. although it may favor
such tariff. 1t ought to defend the action
OF the fOrty-one Democrats in the House OF
Representatives headed by Mr.. RANDALL
who are in favor of fighting the presiden-
tiaI battle upon the issues formulated IN the
Virginia platform.
The Times will do us favor, and sur
prise us very much as well, ii it will point
10 single editorial that eyer appeared in
our columns which iustiges 1t in calling
the Dispatch a "high-tariT paper" or in
saving that we sound " the slOries OF pro-
tectiOu."
II WATTERsON, HUTCHINs. MORRISON,
HURD, BLACKBURN, and the rest OF the Dem
ocrats OF that stripe, would agree not to
try to force upon the Democratic party at
Chicago a resolution declaring FOR tariff
for revenue only, we would gladly promise
never TO touch the subject OF the tariff
again before the meeting OF the Chicago
Convention. We have said all that we
have said on the subject for no other pur-
pose than TO prevent at Chicago blunder
that could never be corrected. Read
the news from Oregon-a Democratic
limited States Senator and i Democratic
-. of pnnrpSQnf
lost. Why? We do not know to GER
tainty, but we suspect that it was because
the WATTERsON Democrats insist upon di-
yidiny the Demo ratio party INTO two fac
tions-because they will not agree that
such Democrats us the Democrats OF Viz
ginia, West Virginia, Ohio, New Jersey.
and Pennsylvania are Democrats at all.
And because we stand by Virginia and
her Democrats, we are charged with being
a"tariff agitator.' Never was grosSer in
Justice done to journal.
Perhaps the Times does not exchange
with the CoWier-JournQl, the Washington
Post, and other such journals. We copy
from the latter paper short article:
DIMOCE ATTIC ' inc ItlloCis+tlC
rariy IS as broad rs the continent. but ~ has no
room for a PrOieetiunist. The party OF 1854 Is
the party Of 1876. the party OF 1890 the party OF
lS4G, the party Of lSiC. IL beileyes thal III
rnstSm -housc taxation should be only for revenue
The Chicago platform must be clear ahd eX-
pIicii. II must voice the Democrauc demand IN
sfraichtfcrward Democratic fashion. III must
clcave 10 revenue reform as the great Issue OF inc
day, And IL must endorse the action OF the Demo
cratic Representatives in the Forty eighth Con-
grss in trying TO make that reform possible before
the presidential campaign began. -. &c..
at will be 'he duty OF the DenocraItG ooiiN en-
ton 10 make clear and nIeq9ivocal declaraiion,a
saws Sneaker Carlisle. "1he Democratic doctrine
Of tariff for revenue must he pnt 20 i ihe fS
tion--a tariff for revenue only" says MIR. Cox.
ave send our appeal u Chicago In fril coma,
dence," saws Mr.. DOrsh,imer. " IL must be the old
Dlatform as well ~ tic old ticket" says Mr. h0l-
man The Convention VIII make It's declaration
80 clear and bold that every Democrat viii have
10 endorse H." says Dir. lurd. lit would not be
democratic 81 IL did not" SAWS Sir. Hewitt.
Ills is the determined sentiment Of the party.
Ietthose who oppose " take warning. The Pro-
iectonisis must co. Washington Post, Nay 20.
The Post SAYS, "The Protectionists
must go"-that is, must leave the Demo-
cratic party. Does the TINES think we
ought 10 allow such articles to pass unnO-
ticed, and the whole country be allowed to
beleye that the Democrats OF Ohio, Vir
ginia. New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Yves
Virginia are fit only TO be read out OF thu
party as proteetionists
Who are some Of these Protectionists ;
that must go"p The gallant VOORHEES,
Of Indiana: Governor JOE Brown, o
Georgia; ex-senator EATON, of Connecti
cut; the incorruptible. fearless RANDALL
the indefatigable worker, McADoo; and,
taking the list OF the Democrats who voted
on the 14th Of April against considering