The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1888-09-15
Mr.. Harrison's Letter.

Mr. Harrison's letter of acceptance was
given TO the public on Wednesday. 1t is con-
siderably shorter than Mr. Cleveland s, and in
some respects is labored effort not to say too
much, and at the same time to touch upon
the salient points of his party's platform. In
endeavoring to complete the latter, he evil
IDENTIFY became weary of his task, and in the
closing paragraph contents himself with a
simple enumeration of the remaining planks
and endorses them.
The letter must suffer greatly in comparison
with Mr.. Clevelands. 1t lacks the strong,
vigorous and expressive English Mr.. Cleve-
land employs; lacks his frankness and direct
ness, and shows i'll preparation for the dis
cussion of the leading issue of the contest.
In dealing with the question of taxation
Mr.. Harrison merely lays down beliefs. For
instance he says the Republicans believe that
a tax laid for protection is constitutional,
while the Democrats dissent. He does not
argue the point. While still on the subject of
taxation he says:
Judged by the Executive Message in De-
cember last, by the Mills bill, by the debates
in Congress, and by the st. Louis platform,
the Democratic party will, if supported by the
country, place the tariff laws upon purely
revenue basis. This is practical free trade"
Free trade would render custom houses
useless, for there would be no taxes to collect,
consequently there would be no use for Gus
toms officers nor custom houses for the trans
action of business. Mr.. Harrison is well
aware of this, but to make it appear that the
Democratic party is free-trade party, he
declares that reduction of taxation to rev.
enue basis would be practically free trade.
We will not argue the falsity of such a posi-
ton, but let Senator Sherman, of Ohio, do it
for u.s. In 1867, when the tariff schedule was
under consideration in the Senate, Mr.. Sher-
man said
SIT is, therefore, simply an absurdity to
talk now about free trade tariff, r
because the wit of man could not possibly
frame tariff that would produce one hundred
and forty million dollars in gold without am
ply protecting our domestic industry"
Any tariff tax at ALL would be prohibition
of free trade, and, as Mr.. Sherman says, it is
simply absurd to talk about free trade tariff.
He also asserted that a tariff that would pro-
duce $40, 900 in gold would afford ample
protection to our domestic industry. By the
Mills bill it is estimated that the revenue to
be raised from customs duties will be about
$3.50, 100000. This is ten million less than
the amount Senator Sherman declared to be
ample for protection, but the bill also pro-
tects domestic industry land benefits the con-
sumer) by adding to the free list raw mater
ials that must be obtained in the main from
abroad The free list RENTS nearly 500, 000,
600. Duties collected for the last fiscal year,
ended June 80, 1883, amounted in round
numbers to S179,000,000. Upon the basis of
last year, the Mills bill reduces customs $780,
900, 900. 1t also adds $40, 900, 900 to the free
list. This, as noted, is benefit to the man
ufacturer to that extent, and the bill, then,
actually reduces the revenue, in protective
sense, to about $150,0O0,000, or ten million
more than the high water mark stated by Mr.
Sherman.
Further on, Mr.. Harrison says:
s'We cannot doubt, without impugning their
integrity that if free to act upon their convic-
tons they (the Demoerats) would so revise
our laws as to lay the burden of the customs
revenue upon articles that are not produced
in this country, and to place upon the free
list all competing foreign products. :"
The Mills bill, upon which the Democratic
party stands, proposes just the reverse of this
Wool is freed from duty of ten and twelve
cents pound. Only one-third of the amount
used in this country is produced here, and
some kinds that are essential for manufac-
lures is not grown at ALL Tin is also freed
from taxation. 1t is an article of common
use, and the tax is removed because there is
no tin in this country, the revenue is not
needed and the tax cannot benefit any Amer
lean industry.
In the statement just quoted Mr.. Harrison
evinces total misconception of the Demo
cratic policy, and ignorance of the Mills bill.
We cannot conclude otherwise without sim
pugning'' his integrity.
Mr.. Harrison now is opposed to Chinese
immigration, though he spent much of his
time in the Senate to prevent its prohibition,
and he is solicitors about the laboring man,
though he once, as the attorney of a railroad,
was in favor of shooting down the employees
of the road who had struck to better their
condition.
Trusts are condemned in the letter, but it
must be remembered that the "Uncrowned
King" the Embodiment of Republicanism'
says trusts are private affairs with which
neither the President nor the people have
anything to do.
The letter as a whole is a weak document,
and shows very superficial knowledge of
public affairs for one who is candidate for
the highest Office in the government, timid-
ity for fear of blunder and an indirection not
liable to increase his chances of success.