The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1888-10-18
THURNAN'S LETTER.
The Old Romans Official and
Formal Acceptance of the
Nomination.
Other Events Transmitted in Sun
day Nights Associated
Press Dispatches.

| COLUMBUS, D., October l4.-JudRe
ThurmRn's letter of acceptance was given
to the press this evening. The first draft
of the letter was in the judges hand,
writing, and typewriter copies showed
only few changes in punctuation from
the original. The letter is as follows:
COLUMBUS, O., October -, 1885, Hon,
Patrick A. Collins and others, committee,
gentlemen: In obedience to custom
send you this formal acceptance of my
nomination for the Office of vice-presi-
| dent of the United States, made by the
national convention of the democratic
party at St. Louis. When you did me the
honor to call upon me at Columbus
and officially notify ue of
my nomination l expressed to
you my sense of obligation to the conven-
ton and stated that, although had not
sought the nomination l did not feel at
! liberty under the circumstances to decline
| it. l thought then, as | still think, that
whatever l could properly do TO promote
the re- election of President Cleveland
ought to do. His Administrative has been
marked by such integrity, good sense,
manly courage and exalted position, that
just appreciation of these high qualities
seem to call for his reelection. l am
also strongly impressed with the belief
that his reelection would powerfully tend
to strengthen that feeling of fraternity
among the American people that is so
essential to their welfare, peace and hap
piness, and to the perpetuity of the
union and of our free institutions.
he ,,la &c
convention, and l cannot too strongly ex-
press my dissent from the heretical teach
ings of monopolists, that the welfare of the
people can be promoted by a system OF
taxation far in excess of the wants of the
government. The idea that the pee Pile
can be enriched by heavy and unnecessa airy
taxation; that a mans condition can be
improved by taxing him on all he wears,
on all his wife and children wear, on all his
tools and impliments of industry, is an
obvious absuIdity. To fill the vaults of
the treasury with an Idle surplus for
which the government has no legitimate
use, and to thereby deprive the people of
the currency needed for their business
and daily wants, and to create powerful
and dangerous stimulus TO extravaganza
and corruption in the expenditures of the
government, seems to me to be policy
at variance with every sound principle OF
government and of political economy.
The necessity for reducing taxation to
prevent such an accumulation of surplus
revenue and consequent depletion OF
circulating medium is so apparent that
no party dares to deny it. But when We
come to consider the modes by which a
reduction may be made, We find wide
antagonism between Que party and the
monopolist leaders of our political OPP
ponents. We seek to reduce taxes upon
the necessaries of life; our opponents
seek to increase them. We say give to
the masses of the people cheap and good
clothing, cheap blankets, cheap tools and
cheap lumber; the republicans, by their
proposed bill, say increase the taxes on
clothing and blankets and thereby in
crease their cost; maintain a high duty
on tools of the farmers and mechanics
and upon the lumber which they need for
the construction of thgir modest dwell
lings, shops and barns, aud thereby pre-
vent their obtaining their necessaries at
reasonable prices.
Can any sensible man doubt as to where
he should stand in this controversy? Can
any we'll informed man be deceived by the
false pretense that system so unreason-
able and unjust is for the benefit of labor
ing men? Much is said about the competi-
ton of American laborers with the pauper
labor of Europe, but does not every man
who looks around him see and know that
an immense majority of laborers in
America are not engaged in what are
called protected industries And as TO those
who are employ ed in such industries, is it
not undeniable that the duties pro-
posed by the democratic measure
called the "Mills bill'' far exceed the diff
ference between American ard European
wages, and, therefore, if it were admit d
that our workingmen can be protected by
tariffs against cheaper labor, they would be
fully protected and more than protected
by that bill. Does not every we'll informed
man know an increase in the price of
home manufactures produced by high
tariff does not 60 into pockets of work
ingmen, but only tends to swell the profits
of others? 1t seems to me that, if the
policy of the democratic party is plainly
presented, all must understand that we
seek TO make the cost OF living less and at
the same time increase the share of the
laboring man in the benefits of national
prosperity and growth.
am very respectfully your obedient
servant, ALLAN G. THURMAN.