, 1888-10-16
THURMAN.
His Brief But Foreibfe Letter
Of Acceptance.
The Methods of the Republican
Party
Contrasted With Sound Demo
cratic Policy.

COLUMBUS, Oct. 14.-Judge Thur
mans letter of acceptance was given to
the press this evening. The first draft of
the letter was in the Judges handwriting,
and typewriter copies showed only a few
changes in punctuation from the original.
The letter is as follows:
COLUMBUS, o. Oct. 12.-Hon. Patrick
A. Collins and Others. ConsmtHee-GEN-
TLEMEN: In obedience to custom, l send
you my formal acceptance of my nomina-
ton for the Office of vice president of the
United States. made by the national con-
yention of the Democratic party at St.
Louis. When you did me the honor to
call upon me at Columbus and officially
notified me of my nomination L expressed
to you my sense of obligation to the con-
ventlon and stated that although | had
not sought the nomination, | did not feel
at liberty, under the circumstances, to de-
cline 1t. L thought then, as | still think,
that whatever [ could properly do to
promote the reelection of President
Cleveland,
OUGHT TO DO.
His administration has been marked by
such integrity, good sense, manly courage
n exalted patriotism that a just appeci-
alton of these high qualities seem to call
tor his reelection. | am also strongly
impressed with the belief that his re-elec-
ton would powerfully tend to strengthen
that feeling of fraternity among the
American people that is SO essential to
their welfare, peace and happiness, and
to the pertetuity of the Union and of our
free institutions. [ approve the platform
OF the st. Louis convention and [ cannot
too strongly express my dissent from the
heretical teachings of the %monopolists
that the welfare of men can be promoted
by a system of exorbitant taxation far in
excess of the wants of the government.
The idea that a people can be enriched by
heavy and unnecessary taxation, that a
mans condition can be improved by tax
ing him on all he wears, on all his wife
and children wear, on all his tools and i'm
plements of industry, is an obvious abb
surdity. To fill the vaults OF the treasury
with an idle surplus for which the gov
eminent has no legitimate use, and to
thereby deprive the people of currency
needed for their business and daily wants,
and to create a powerful and dangerous
stimulus to extravaganza and corruption
in the expenditures of the government
seem to me to be a policy at variance
with every sound principle of government
and of
POLITICAL ECONOMY.
The necessity of reducing taxation to pre-
vent such an accumulation of surplus
revenue, and the consequent depletion of
the circulating medium is so apparent
that no party dares to deny it, but when
we come to consider the modes by which
the reduction may be made we find a wide
antagonlsm between our party and the
monopolistic leaders of our political oppo-
nents. 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 platform and their leaders in the
senate, by their proposed bill, say increase
the taxes on clothing and blankets and
thereby increase their cost maintain a
high duty on the tools of the farmer and
mechanic and for the lumber which they
need for the construction of their modest
dwellings, shops and barns, and thereby
prevent their obtaining these necessaries
at reasonable prices. Can any sensible
man doubt as to where he should stand
in this controversy? Can any well-in-
formed man be deceived by the false pre-
tense that a system so unreasonable and
unjust is for
H BENEFIT OF LABoRING MEN?
Much is said about competition 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 the laborers in Amer
lea are not engaged in what are called the
protected industries? And as to those
who are employed in such industries, is it
not undeniable that the duties proposed by
the Democratic measure called the Mills
bill far exceed the difference between
American and European wages. and that
therefore, if it were admitted hat 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 well informed man
know that the increase in the price OF
holno mduuldCtuIGs DIOuuCCu ny d ulBu
tariff does not go into the pockets of labor
ing men, but only tends to swell the pro
fits 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 n~ationa'
prosperity and growth. | am, very re,
specially. your obedieut servant.
ALLEN G. THURMAN.
For fine watch repairing,