The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1888-09-20
Trying 10 Quibble Out Of It.

Irving 10 Quibble Out Of It.
The speech of Representative ost' Oh
the Blair Bill seems to have served as
bomb-shell in the Democratic camp. The
press of that persuasion has assaileo IL
with merciless invective and essayed 10
proye that its premise that the Dill Is
Republican measure, offered by RepuD'
lican. IS unfounded. The Petersburg Ap-
peal. Richmond Dispatch and Richmond
Wing, especially, endeayor TO convince Inc
public that it is not party question: anu
that it is wrong to make 1t such. we inusI
remind these journals that they warned
their party friends in Congress against
the defeat of the measure at this session,
after it had passed the Senate for the third
time. Oft and over again did they assert
that if the Democratic House did not ap-
prove it by its enactment into la" Tile
party would be held responsible for the
failure, and justly 50. When Senator
Daniel declaI ed in the Roanoke aConVeh'
ton that he had not voted for the resolu-
ton of thanks to Speaker Carlisle because
he had fashioned the Educational Com
mittee to killlhe Blair Bill, there was no
protesting voice on the occasion, and yet
the party in Congress proceeded to re-
elect Mr.. Carlisle to the same position to
repeat his act of the former session. That
the Democrats are responsible for the
failure of the bill this session as in the
M flJ minded
should deny.
But the acts of individual members of
the party, as the accredited and empow-
cred agents of the Democracy IN Con-
gress, IN smothering the bill. is OF light
moment, compared with the deliberate le-
selves of two Democratic National Con-
ventions, the highest authority in the par
ty, These Conventions made it a party
issue plain and distinct. The Convention
of 1884 resolved that we are opposed 10
all propositions which upon any pretext
would convert the General Government
into machine for collecting taxes 10 lie
distributed among the States or citizens
thereof The resolution had direct ref
erence to the Blair Bill, and was intended
to declare and emphasize the purpose and
the policy of the Democratic party. The
Convention of 1883 reaflirmed the plat
form of 1884, including the resolution
above quoted and thus committed the
party against the bill. 1t is known that
the President is opposed, to it. and if it had
passed the House either last session or
this, he would have vetoed il. 1t is known
that Carlisle. Blackburn, Beck, and the
leading free trade adherents OF the Pres
ident are opposed TO it. They do not
want to reduce the surplus in that way
They desire to cut 1t off!at the custom
house for the benefit of English manufac-
lures and to more surely reach the ultl.
mate purpose they have in view of estab.
fishing free trade. The education of the
INDECENT children of The Country is some.
thug .they care nothing about. Ii they
can retain the internal revenue tax, and
thus perpetuate the whisky trust; Can
fasten the internal tax Oh tobacco, and
thus have pretext for taking off customs
duties, they Will have blazed the way fol-
future free trade. There is consistency
running all through the sche and i,
seLds to free trade.
1t is strange that the Hldec Appeal
should sickle over the point that ii
raises, that when the Blair bill was first in
PRODUCED during the time the Republicans
had small majority in each House OF
Congress, it was not passed by either. Our
cotemporary knows that no action at all
was taken, for the reason that the propo-
sitlon was novel-it was apparently an
innovation-and had not been considered
or digested by one in twenty OF the mem
bers of either party. 1t was not SUD-
ject of discussion in party circles, nor
was caucus action taken on it. Not un-
til the press had discussed and public
sentiment was manifested in relation to
1t, was it seriously thought of in Con
gress, When the beneficent provisions
and purposes of the Blair bill became ia
miliar, and the wise end it had in view
more fully comprehended and appreciated.
then it was that action was taken. When IL
was brought to a vote, a majority OF the
iority of the Democrats opposed it. That
has been the relation of parties to 1t ever
since. The bill has been passed three
times by Republican Senate and as
often smothered by Democratic House.
It was condemned by the National Con
yentions of the Democratic party IN 1884
and 1888, and candidate nominated for
President in each instance, who would Veto
it were it presented for his signature.
With these patent facts before it we
cannot understand why paper so fair
usually as the Mder- Apte cal should attempt
to pervert the facts and the reason OF the
case, in the interest of Mr.. Tucker, who
is opposed not only to our contemporary s
views on this question. but on the tariff
issue, as we'll as the internal revenue mat
ter. His opponent. Mr.. Yost, earnestly
favors the Blair bill, the protective policy
and the repeal of the internal revenue tax.
as does the hadec Appeal. yet it would aid
in defe ating every one of these interests
by the election of Mr.. Tucker, because he
calls himself Democi at. and the Iadec
Appeal does not deem it opportune to say il
is Republican, although maintaining the
administrative principles and policies OF
that party.
Gen. HRrrlson's Letter of Acceptance
We publish Oh the 1st page the admira
BILE letter of Gen. BENZ. Harrison, accept
ing the nomination of the Chicago Con.
vention for the Presidency. 1t is clear,
incisve and able paper, and will be read