The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-07-13
DEMOCRATIC TRADITIONS,


DEMOCRATIC TRADITIONS.
The effort Of the avalanche to con-
vince the Democrats, who have CO.
operated with their party for nearly
half a century in opposition to the
principles OF protection that they are
mistaken in supposingthe Democratic
party hostile to protective tariffs, is as
absurd as the attempt to prove that
the Baptists do not favor baptism by
immersion. II there is any one feature
which distinguishes the Democratic
party above and beyond all others, it
is opposition TO protective tariffs.
From 1886 to 1856, the questions OF
bank and tariff were the leading is
sues between the Wings and Demo-
crats-the Wings favoring national
bank and a tariff that would protect
our infant industries--the Democrats
opposing, both on grounds of ex-
pedienoy and constituLionality. The
old citizens who engaged in politics
during the days OF the grand old
Wing party remember the issues
made, can still repeat the arguments
used on both sides, and are amazed at
any attempt to prove that the Demo-
cratic party has not always opposed
the principles OF protection. Since
the war the Democratic party has
gradually renewed its allegiance to its
old traditions. Tllden squarely planted
himself on the platform, ave de-
maud that all custom house taxation
shall be only for revenue" and was
elected President OF the United Safes
by lager majority OF the popular
vote than that which elected Cleve-
land. The 1876 Democrats il Congress
who recently voted for the Morrison
bill did 30 because they were opposed
TO the principles OF protection as EN-
bodied in the present ubiquitous"
war tariff. The Democratic news-
papers in every part OF the
Union that denounce the REQ
rsancy of the thirty-fve Democrats
who joined the 122 Republicans in
refusing TO discuss, amend and i'm
prove Morrison's bill with the view OF
relieving the people as promised are
opposed to protective tatiffs. In every
part Of the country, Democr ats are ex-
posing the fallacy Of the Aualdnche'S
position, by declaring themselves in
unmistakable language against the
principles OF protection. Only a few
days since the Democrats OF Iowa in
State convention resolved, "that to i'm
pose taxes for any other purpose than
the raising OF the necessary revenue for
the support Of the government is I'M
constitutional" On Saturday last the
Democrats Of Cooke county, Tennessee,
held a mass convention and resolved
"that, we oppose high taxes, protsc.
tive tariff, monopoies OF every char.
acter, and Capitalization OF national
power, as the direct enemies OF the
lsboring masses, and dangerous TO
the progress and ttlbility OF the gov
eminent" The Supreme Court of the
United States has decided that taxes
are ASSESSED exclusively for public
purposes and cannot be levied for
private uses. Even Mr.. Randall
rays that there is no warrant in the
constitution for levying duties fol
protection. Yet we are told that
the Democraiic party has never OPP
posed protection. During the last sil
months the reliable Democrats in Con
gress have day after day opposed pro
lection showed that protection doe'
not pro.ectth the people that the farmer
and manufacturers will be benefited
by a reduction Of imposl duties to the
revenue STANDARD; and still Demo
ciat insis that Democrats are no
opposed to the principles a proiec
ton. In a future sIticle we PROPOSE
shoEiog by the debates in Congress
that the Democrats opposed the tariff
Of 1879 because /! resogn zed the prin
cipls Of protection, aud occurred ii
repeal Ia lsiG on the ground e thi
very objection; and, further, We vii
show b. extracts that in every can
yass In Teane'see from 1886 to 1861
the Democrats, On the stump and II
their conventions, made opposition I
a prot sctive tariff a leading issue il
. every poiifical contest