Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-09-21
Haruson's Record.

bill upon its passage, but he had offered
number Of amendments to 1t.
But how much in earnest he was in
casting that vote appears from the speech
which he made in opposition to the
BLAIR bill, an extract from which we
quoted a few days ago, and which extract
vas given to tho public by the Phila-
delphia Telegraph, one Of his support
srs. We reproduce it-os follows;
"There ia giving that pauperizes,
there is giving that enfeebles. 1t IS
against that sort OF giving that protest.
Tl,o wisest managers OF benevolence in
these late years have come TO the cOnclu-
zion that giving should always be so re-
culated as 10 save self-respect and
awaken in tho mind Of the recipient the
lost faith IN his ability to take care of
himself We should carefully avoid that
Giving which creates disposition to lean
and 20 expect. which takes the stamina
and strength and seli-depcndence ont of
men. That principle will, think, apply
70 the giving which is proposed by this
(the Blair bah"
Mr.. HARGIsoy in his letter Of accept
anco insisted upon it that the Democrats
were on the way 10 free trade whatever
they might profess. He declared that
they were practically free traders. He
Eaid that it WAS not the length OF the
ftep 60 much rs the direction Of it that
lie was concerned Mountaineering that
starting in the direction of free trade the
Democrats would soon reach that rs their
destination. So we say that however Mr.
HAIE1soN may attempt 70 explain the
language quoted above, that language
could not have come from friend TO the
BLAIR bin. He declared that the
giving which was proposed by that
bill was q "giving" which would take
tbe stamina and strength and self-de-
pendence ont Of men. He protested
against that sort Of giving. 1t seems to
us that Mr.. HARRISON must have voted
for the BLAIR biz under compulsion.
No real friend Of it could have said OF it
what Mr.. HARRISON said The voice Of
11sAU was in the vote, but not in the
speech.
Astothe tobacco tax. Mr.. HARRsoN'sre-
cord is much worse. Thefact that though
hevotedtvice in 1883 againsta bill intend
ed to relieve the southern planter of only
q portion OF an odious tax, and now pre-
tends 10 be in favor of abolishing that
tax altogether, iustifes us IN claiming
that he is not earnest in this matter. His
party in its platform declared that 1t
was in favor Of aboGshing the tax on
tobacco, and be simply stepped upon
that platform. lie did not choose for
himself. He merely yielded to the force
of circumstances. il elected President
lie will never recommend the abolition
OF the tobacco tax.
What claim, then, has Mr.. HARRISON
upon the good people of Virginia?
None vhateyer. He has proved himself
unworthy Of his Virginia ancestry in his
conduct as a northern man. "When
Virginian falls, he falls far
We have heretofore referred our read
ers TO the time and place of Mr.. HARRI-
SONS votes on the tobacco tax; but,
deeming it point against him which all
the Democratic speakers IN Virginia
should press, we will repeat the state
ment. On the 9th of February, 1888.
Mr.. HARRISON voted against Mr.. BEcK's
motion to reduce the tax on tobacco to
eight cents per pound. The tax was then
sixteen cents, and the proper committee
had reported i'll favor Of reducing 1t to
twelve cents, and Mr.. BECK had moved
to reduce it to eight cents Mr.. HARRI-
son, we repeat, voted in the negative.
See Congressional Record of February
8, 1882. page 2476. And on the 10th OF
fhe same month Mr. GoRMAN moved to
repeal all taxes on manufactured tobacco,
snuff, and cigars, aud ell special or Ii
cense taxes on dealers in such articles,
and on retail dealers in tobacco. On this
motion Mr. HARRISON voted NO" See
Congressional Record, February l6,
1855, page 2797.