Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1888-06-21
CLEVELANDS EVOLUTION.
His PROGRESS FROM PROTECTION
PRINCIPLES TO FREE TRADE.

~hNSS SpSW EnStESllO r
PRINCIPLES TO FREE TRADE.
The Difference Between 1885, and 1855
Promises Made in tho First xear of HI.
Administration Broken In the Last
caune of His Change of Heart.
In 1884 Joseph O'Connor, now editor OF
The Rochester IN. ~ P~ost-Express, was
a stanch supporter of Cleveland for presi.
dent. He had also supported him for
mayor Of Buffalo and for governor of the
state of New York. Now he is out against
him IS strongly az he was for him. Mr..
oConnor gives his reasons in @ five column
article In The New York Sun, explaining
hrst that as he is not a political aspirant
and mad never asked or expected a public
place as q reward for his political services,
bis change of sentiment cannot be at
tributed to soreheadism. Summed up his
reasons are that Cleveland has proven a
complete failnfe and has ruthIessly broken
every promise he has ever made. These
statements Mr.. O'Connor proves at length
bY strong but unimpassioned argument.
That part relating to Qeveland's tariff pre
tenses and practices Is here given:
The declaration Of principles made by
the national Democratic convention Of
1884 was very cautiously worded, in SO
far as 1t dealt with the reform of the
tariff, as 1t was the opinion of politicians
generally that the brief demand for "a
tariff for revenue only" made in 1880. had
led to the defeat of the Democratic candi-
date of that year, Gen. Hancock. Mr..
Cleveland carefully avoided any allusion
to b subject In his letter of acceptancs:
and there was G great anxiety through
out the canvass to keep Democratic
speakers and editors from discussing it,
In some quarters, the tariff terror was
pittable. In the inaugural address Mr..
Cleveland merely mentioned the tariff,
demanding that our system of revenue
shall be 80 adjusted as to relieve the peo-
pie from unnecessary taxation, having a
due regard to the interests of capital in
vested and workingmen employed in
American industries. and preventing the
accumulation of a surplus In the treasury
to tempt extravaganza and waste"
The stanchest protectionist could not
quarrel with this statement. In his first
message Mr.. Cleveland said of revenue re-
duction:
.'The proposition with which we have
to deal Is the reduction Of the revenue re.
csivsd by the government and Indirectly
paid by the people from customs duties,
The question of free trade is not involved.
nor is there now any occasion for the
general discussion of the wisdom or ex-
pediency of q protective system.
"Justice and fairness dictate that in
any modification of our present laws re.
lating to revenue the industries and in.
terests which have been encouraged by
such laws, and In which our citizens have
largeinvestments should not be ruthiessly
injured OF destroyed. We should also
deal with the subject in such O manner as
to protect the interests of American labor,
which Is the capital of our workingmen:
Its stability and proper remuneration fur
nish the most justifiable pretext for a
protective policy"
A brief statement that there should be
some reduction ON import duties within
these limitations, and that the reduction
should be on the necessaries of life, fol.
lowed. Evidently. from the admission
that o protective system keeps up wages.
and that without 1t certain great indus
tries and interests would be destroyed,
the political evolution of the president
was rrroceding very slowly He was care
full beyond the verge of caution. In the
second annual message, more space was
given TO the subject, but, although there
was marked progress in the direction of
traditional Democracy. it was discussed
with the same timidity, not to say equi-
vocation. Recommending revenue reduc-
ton, he threw out, to use the phrase Of
another famous political sailor, ssan an
Choir to windward."
''The relation of the workingman to the
qovnrun la tSo nf +haE ,r4. IL
manner In which 1T palpably influences
the question of wages, should not be for
gotten in the justifable prominence given
to the proper maintenance of the supply
and protection of well paid labor; and
these considerations suggest such an ar
fangement of government as
shall reduce the expense of living while
it does not curtail the opportunity for
work, nor reduce the compensation of
American labor and ~unfavorably affect it's
condition and the digniied place it holds
In the estimation of our people"
The third annual message was devoted
to tariff reform. and shaped
the issue for the canvass Of 1888.
1t Is an elaborate and powerful
argument for revenue reduction on
free trade lines; and yet at intervals
old terror of offending protected man.
u~facturers n laborers manifests itself.
in various other papers by MIR. Cleve-
land, there are signs of a struggle between
minds-a shifting from side to side,
rs II one man were trying to say some-
thing bold and definite, and another were
constantly interfering with provisos and
notifications. For instance:
Our progress toward a wise conclusion
viii not be improved by dwelling on the
of protection and free trade. This
savors too much Of bandying epithets. It
Is a condition which confronts us. not a
theory. Relief from the condition may
INVOLVE q slight reduction In the adyant-
age which we award our homo produc-
tions, but the entire withdrawal Of such
advantages should not be contemplated.
The question of free trade is absolutely
irreVelant, and the persistent claim made
In certain quarters that all efforts to re-
ieve our people from unjust taxation are
schemes of the SO called free traders, is
mischieyous and far removed from any
of the public good"
OF course this wavering affords to the
weaker brethren some comfort. st Is
condition which confronts us. not q
is o taking phrase. which Demo-
Gratis without the courage of their con-
are fond Of quoting; but it is a
merely rhetorical subterfuge. The theory
lies behind the condition and Il makes all
the difference In the world whether the