The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-01-05
A Mastery Discussion of Great National
Questions by Senator John Sherman.
A speech Dealing Exclusively in Facts ane
Figures, and Embodying Convincing
Argumentin Favor of Protective Policy.
Fallacy of the Presidents Assertions
Proven by Plain Appeals to Truth.
A Document That Furnishes Incontroyertibls
Arguments for Friends of Protection
Voorhees, Defends Cieveland's Plan.
s,ecial to the Indianapolis journal.

sSacial to the Indianapolis Journal
WASHINGTON, Jan. 4.--Senator Sherman
scored an important point, to-day, in his race
for the presidency. His answer to the Presi-
dents tariff message had been looked for with
curiosity, and when the Senator arose to address
the Senate, the seats in the chamber, mostly
empty, were quickly filed Senators on both
sides listened attentively, and as the speaker
proceeded it soon became evident that his listene
ers were not merely giving him respectful, bus
interested attention. Senator Sherman has
perhaps. never before deli yered speech in se
happy q manner as to-day, and those present
who had thought he could never
warm up to any subject must
have been greatly surprised When
he had finished he congratulated by many
of his colleagues, and it may be said that all
Republicans in the Senate subscribe to the SEN.
timents and views SO plainly and tersely stated
by the Ohio Senator. The speech is considered
complete statement of the views of the Repub-
hcans on the revenue question. He stated the
principle of protection very comprehensbly
when he said it was not question of a dollar to
an individual, but of general public pros
perity, and that protection must be mutual to be
equitable and really beneficial. as to dos
prive one industry of protection. as tho
President proposed to do by recommending
the adjustment of the duty on wool, wouL
destroy the equity of protection. While defend
ing the tariff whole. he declared himself IL
favor of revising it. of removing all duties on
necessaries which. by of climatic or
other conditions, cannot be produced in this
country and of so adjusting all other duties thas
may now be unfair as to make them reduce the
duty on sugar one-haf This certainly meets
with great favor on the part of Republicans, and
not a few Democrats also. So far the
internal revenue is concerned, the Senator
not only wants it abolished, but he adj
vances new idea by saying that tha
States might be left to tax all splrituous and
malt liquors to suit themselves, and thereby
create a fruitful source of revenue which would
very greatly tighten the burden of direct taxa
ton. The way in which the Senator dissected
the Presidents message meets with the hearth
est approval of all Republicans who heard him,
and it is also considered that he has shown con-
clusively that the policy of the administration
has been to pile up the surplus. because it has
refused to adopt the means provided by law to
reduce it.
Senator Voorhees, followed Mr.. Sherman, but
his speech fell fat. The Democratic Senators
listened to Voorhees, because Sherman had an
interested audience, but they could not conceal
their Efforts TO keep their seats. Senator Voor-
hees certainly is great stump speaker and can
make stirring address to jury, but his Sc.
speeches very different affairs. He read
rather monotonouslv from manuscript and his
speech had neither literary arsumentative
merit. 1t was the old, old story of free trade
expectation in the same old dress made overN
a little, as women do old dresses to make then
look new; otherwise the speech was only re-
markable for fisttery to the President, the dis
penser OF patronage.