The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1888-05-10

of fal:e pretenses upon the American
people unparallel in the history of
politioal parties. Did the party send Mr..
Carlisle 10 New York before the last
election to explain the tariff plank of the
Chicago platform? Did it send Mr..
Hemphill tn, re TO talk to the labolers as
he h2d talked during the debate on the
floor? No, the managers of the democratic
party knew that New York could never be
carried in that way. When the columns
were shaken and defeat seemed inevitable,
they turn' d to this brainiest and ablest
man in the party. They called for s.
j. Randall, and he went to New York to
explain to the voters that the msnufact-
uring interests of the country would not
be disturbed in the event of the
success OF the democratic party, and
that the tariff plank in the Chicago
plat 'orm meant only wise and iudicious
rearrargement of the inequalities which
ell parties admitted to exist in the tariff
to greater or less extent and to require
treatment. Il had been Mr.. Randalls
boast that his efforts had made it posi-
BILE for Cleveland to occupy the presiden-
tial chair. How had the democratic party
repaid his efforts and how had his pledges
been redeemed by that party? If rumor
was correct, Randall was no longer Wis
itor at the White House. His counsel was
no longer sought or needed by his party.
His influence had been curtsiled by rHis-
ing up rival whose control of federal
patronage had been used to humiliate and
disgrace the once honored leader of the
democratic party. In conclusion he en-
tered his solemn protest against this at.
tempt to overthrow the great business in
dustries of America.
Mr.. Mensur, of Missouri, delivered an
exhaustive speech in support of the bill.
He commended that the internal revenue
system should be maintained for the pay
ment of pensions and the remainder of
the war debt. He quoted statistics in
support of his assertion that the people
were more prosperous uudtr low than a
high tariff.
Mr.. j. X. Taylor,' of Ohio, denounce d
free trade as fragment of the rebellion
and as being as dangerous to the country
IN 1888 as secession had been in 1861.
Free trade had no more right to supplant
protection than the confederate oopstitu-
ton had to supplant the constitution of
the United States. The democrats wee
engaged in an effort to unfurl the British
flag and o. en- our market to British manu-
facturers.
Mr.. Richardson, of Tennessee, supported
the bill and referred to the antagon:sm of
the republicans to every effort which
the democratic party had made to
fulfill its pledges of tariff re-
duction. The bill now presented
was wise and conservative measure,
which, while it would not break down the
protective system, would grant some
measures of rel eff to the overburdened
people.
Mr.. McAdoo, of New Jersey, said he
spoke as democrat. He contended the
bsst way in which the surplus could be re-
duced was by the abolition of the internal
revenue system. The revenue ought to
be limited in America to the needs OF
government economically administered
The tariff ought to be adjusted on
foreign articles 50 as to give tt
American laborers a higher recompenst
than European laborers received. He wai
willing to make all reasonable concessions
but he was bound to say he would scorn tt
sacrl flee the labor industry of the repub'
lie to noisy declarations.
The committee then rose and the house
took a recess until 8 p. m, the evening
session to be for debate upon the tariff
| bill