Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-05-31
Paul Clayton.

DEMOCRATS AND PROTECTION.
New York Tribune.
What is to become of the Democrats
who believe in Protection? Their party
calls upon them to vote against the wei
fare of their country, and against the in
terestS of their States. 1t ostracizes
them because they refuse to obey the
dictates of the President, of caucus, or
of convention. Within the party they
have no longer any place to stand. Bills
which they offer for the needs of their
constituents are vetoed, solely because
they, as Representatives, cannot comply
with the Presidents wishes. The patron
age of the Executive is not only refused
when they ask the appointment of
worthy constituents or friends, it is Sys-
tematically used by the President to
break down their influence and destroy
them politically. As Democrats, they
no longer have political life or hope.
Mr.. Randall, for instance, was not ex-
pected to attend a Democratic conven-
ton in Pennsylvania, though for many
years he has been the most influential
Democrat in that State, and to his party
more useful than any other man in the
country. He alone made Mr.. Cleveland's
election possible, and the fruit of that
election to him is that men infinitely
less competent and worthy are preferred,
the President elected by his assurances
gives the lie to these assurances, and Mr..
Randall himself is practically read out
of the party.
The atlantic Constitution, represent
ing Democrats in a State where the
votes of the people are literally of no
account, can easily justify itself for
abiding in submissive relations with the
Democratic party. Its policy, that pa
per declares, is hostile to the interests
of the new South, hostile to the interests
of Alabama, and fatal to the Democrat
ic party, and yet the party must be sup
ported, because Republican success
would menace the State with negro gov
ernment. No words are needed to show
how foolish and illogical this position is,
for if a free trade policy will be fatal to
the Democratic party, any evils to be
apprehended as consequence of Demo
cratic defeat will come in any case. But
in Alabama public opinion is in fetters.
Democrats from Northern States still
have the right and the power to defeat
the interests of the constituents and the
welfare of the Nation.
Democrats who believe in Protection
are not in accord with the Republican
party, and cannot be asked to give it |
their assistance. Neither are the free
trade Mugwumps in accord with the
Democratic party, and yet they elected
Mr.. Cleveland in order to promote the |
cause of free trade. The result proves |
that they knew what they were about |
better than Mr.. Randall did when he as
Sured Democrats that Mr.. Cleveland's |
election would not endanger Protection. |
If the free traders, without distinction |
of party and without regard to their be- |
liefs on other questions, unite to sup
port a free trade President, is it not time |
for all who believe in Protection, regard |
less of their differences on other issues, |
to unite in supporting Republican can
didate.
Mr.. Randall himself, on account of
his past prominence and activity, and |
on account of his conspicu-
Gus part in electing Mr.. Cleveland, is in
an impossible position. But there are
other Democrats by the thousand, in
Western and Southern as well as in
Eastern States, to whom the situation
presents a sharp alternative. The tar
if question must be settled, and so set
tied that it shall not again be disturbed
by either party for years. The welfare
Of the country demands that settlement.
The urgent need of other measures,
which can get no attention until this
question is out of the way, demands that
settlement. 1t can be reached only by
differences on other points,
putting aside for the time party ties
which prevent direct and definite de-
,ision, and uniting all sincere support
srs of Protection in aid of the Republi-
,an candidate. That will involve some
Republican loss, be it granted. But it
would ensure an overwhelming verdict
n favor of the general policy of Protec-
ion, so that no revision of the tariff in
hostility to to that policy would hereaf-
er be proposed by one party or the