The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-08-06
What is the Truth of Itq

G The Hon. Frank Hurd, Free Trad,
of Democrat, and member of Congress from
D. Toledo, Ohio, AYERS in the Interview pub,
/ lishee IN the Philadelphia Inquirer that the
le1 platform Of the Democratic National Con
n vention Is free trade platform. SAL
o idea of protection of any kind. says Mr.
l. Hurd, is clearly excluded from it. The
/ Iprovisions which rel lie to raw materials, to
/ the establishment of some ultimate init
4 mate commercial relations with the other
). American republics, and to the loss of the
. American marine industry on the high or
: | the present tariff, all point to the reauc-
ton of the tariff rates and close approx
innate to free trade. The further declara-
{ ton that all Federal taxation shall be
exclusively for public purposes declares
: the principles on which all tariff reformers
/, are agreed, namely, that no money shall
be collected BY the Government for the
7 purpose of helping any business of indi-
, idaals. The platform declares that here
/ alter taxation must only be for the uses of
! the Government The system that has
hitherto prevailed has levied taxes for the
+ benefit of individuals" 'The platform
: cannot, therefore, but be satisfactory to
, every one who hopes for the adoption of
ultimate free trade in this country"
Being asked how it happened that Dem
ocratic protectionists ike Mr.. Converse
had agreed TO this platform If it is in real
ity free trade platform, Mr.. Hurd an
swered that Mr.. Converse and his friends
endeavored to substitute for the present
platform that of the Ohio Democrats, but
they were voted down, and thereupon they
became satisfied that they would be over
whelmingly defeated in the Convention,
and that their position would be better
while they remained in the Democratic
party by appearing to be content with the
platform, as a majority had agreed upon
It, than by carrying the contest into the
| Convention, where they would be defeated"
In other words, according to Mr.. Hnrd,
Mr.. Conyerse lied when hesaid he liked
it. "The action of the committee to which
| have referred" says Mr.. Hurd, Showed
eonclusively that 1t was their intention to
exclude from the platform everything that
| looked like protection of any kind"
Mr.. John w. Bookwalter of Ohio, who |
was also visited by the reporter of the In |
quirer, shares Mr.. Hurd's opinion. 81
think" he said lit is more specific in its |
de slarations, more unmistakably anti-pro- |
tective, than any former platform of the
Democratic party"
Now are Mr.. Hurd and Mr.. Bookwalter |
right in this view of the Democratic plat
form? We have not been able to see
the matter IN the light which it wears to
their vision; and we quote once more the
language of the platform itself marking in
italics the passages which appear to US to
be clearly protectionist:
"The Democracy pledges itself to purify
the administration from corruption, to re-
store economy, to revive respect for law,
and to reduce taxation to the lowest limit
consistent with due regard to the preserva-
ton of the faith of the nation to its cred
itors and pensioners. Knowing full well,
however, that legislation affecting the ocou-
pations of the people should be cautious
and conservative in method, not in
advance of public opinion, but responsive
to its demands the Democratic party is
pledged to revise the tariff in a spirit of
fairness to all interests. But in making
reduction in taxes il is not proposed to in
jure any domestic Industries; but rather to
promote their healthy growth. From the
foundation of this government taxes col {
leeted at the Custom House have been the
chief source of Federal revenue; such they
must continue 10 be. Moreover, many
industries have come to rely upon legisla.
ten for successful continuance, so that any
change of law must be at every step re-
gardful of the labor and capital thus in-
volyed. The process of reform must be (
subject in the execution to this plain die
tate of justice,
"All taxation shall be limited to the
requirements of ecomonial government.
The necessary reduction in taxation can
and must be effected Without deprivag Amer
icaa labor Of the ability to compete sac
cessttliy 1cH hforeign labor, and acittost i'm
posing to,cer rates of duty than ,CW be ample
to corer any increased cost Of production
ichich may erist in consequence of the
higher rate Of loagas Preraitjng an this eouH-
try. Sufficient revenue to pay all the ex- =,
penses of the Federal Government econom- !
ically administered including pensions, in-
terest and principal of the public debt can
be got under our present system of taxation s
from Custom House taxes on fewer i'm l
ported articles bearing heaviest on articles
OF luxury and hearing lightest on articles {
of necessity,
1--WE therefore denounce the abuses of t
the existing tariff, and subject to the preced s
ina Limitations we demand that Federal tax !
alton shall be exclusively for public pur I
poses, and shall not exceed the needs Of
the Government, economically administer
ed" I.
What is the honest meaning of The
phrase printed in italics above? If you :
chang ethe tariff, without depriving Ameri-
5an labor of the ability to compete success 8
fully with foreign labor, and without impos- ]
ing lower rates of duty than will be ample /
10 cover any increased cost of production t
which may exist in consequence of the
higher rate of wages in this country" do
you not preserve the protective principle
which already exists in it, and which is 7
believed to confer on American labor 'the :
ability TO compete successfully with foreign ).
labor? And do you not agree that your !:
new rates of duty shall be "ample to cover !
any increased cost of production which =
may exist in consequence OF the higher
rate of wages prevailing in this countryp c
Is this anything but the doctrine Of protec- 4
lion Is it anything but the old system C
Of putting the American labor upon an 4
equality with the foreign labor by imposing
protective rates of duty upon foreign pro- {
ducts, SO that they cannot be sold in the =
American market at prices lower than
those of the same goods manufactured in h
this country?
This seems to us, as it seems to Mr. Con- :
verse and Mr.. Randall, to be the clear :
doctrine OF the Chicago platform, and yet
Mr. Hurd and Mr.. Bookwalter may be !: :
right and we may be mistaken; and this !!
view Of the case is considerably strength
ened by the fact that a man so peIspicaci-
ous and so experienced as Gen. Butler
agrees with them in the opinion that, after g
all, the platform is a free trade platform. Q
To the same purport, We read in that able a
and fearless journal, the Philadelphia t
Record, that the platform is Gin favor of {
the tariff to revenue stand /
ard" Y
We trust that this subject will be dis s
cussed until the antagonism between the '
opinion of Mr. Hurd and that of Mr.. Ran :
dali and Mr.. Converse shall be thoroughly I
cleared away, and the subject put beyond
the possibility of further dispute. The :
voters of the country ought not to be delud- ..
ed with any juggle Of words in the |
national platform of either OF the great /;
political parties; and above all they ought !.
not be made to believe that a platform is :.
in favor of free trade when it is really in
favor Of protection, or vice versa. Our
own view has been decided that there is no
iuggIe in this Democratic platform; but We J
DO not like 10 be told BY man so eminent 6
and so candid as Mr.. Hurd that we are
totally IN error upon such question, and
thatt very phraseology which has seemed
to Us to maintain the doctrine of protection, t
is, after. all, only another formula Of free q
trade. I
why Garrison Killed a MANY
In his life and ending Ralston was !
perhaps the typical Californian of the /
early time. In 1S47 be began life as l
1es,,4 s.1s,.l- -, ft,a efaar7, hat Cyonvou 8