The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1889-04-17
what of the Future?"

What of the Future?"
We find an extraordinary article in the
New Albany Ledger, a paper which sup
ports democratic candidates and advocates
republican principles. We quote:
Within the last few weeks one leading In
diana democratic paper, the Terre Haute Ga
zette, edited by the talented W. {. BALL, has
come out flat-footed for free trade. Several
others, including THE INDIANAPOLIS SENTI-
MEL, have grazed the brink of the precipice
with the wheels of their carriage loads of
TRADES against the tariff. Do these gentlemen
realize where they are going when they go over
the precipice? Mr.. CLEVELAND would have
been president and the democratic party have
been in clover instead of in the soup had his
tariff message never been issued. Every
body acknowledges that now. Even
with it, had GORMAN instead of WAT
TERSON won the fight at st. Louis, we
might now have been in power. Will we fol-
low up the blunders committed and add others
of the same kind? 1t is all well enough to talk
about educating the people up to a knowledge
that free trade is good thing, but the people
of this country choose their own teachers and
won't go to school unless they like teacher and
teaching. 4 goodly majority do not believe in
free trade and will not go to schools where it is
taught.
Here is a sad compound of folly and
untruth mot deliberate, we are sure).
So far from everybody admitting" that
Mr.. CLEVELAND would have been presi-
dent ii his tariff message had never been
issued, nobody ''admits" this except few
pseudo democrats of the Randall-Dana
breed, who did everything in their power
to bring about the result they affect to de-
plore. On the contrary, every representa-
tive democratic newspaper and every
democratic leader in the country, with
possibly one or two exceptions, stoutly
deny it.
So far as THE SENTINEL is concerned, it
hasn't the shadow of doubt that but for
Mr. CLEvELAND's magnificent message on
the tariff question, and the splendid in
SEPARATION that bold avowal of righteous
ness gave the democratic party, it would
have been beaten "out of sight" last
November, instead of polling 100000
more votes than the republicans and los
ing the two controlling states by margin
so shadowy that change Of one vote in
every ], 100 in the one and one in every
$500 in the other would have wiped it out.
Whether ga goodly majority of the
American people" do or do not "believe in
free trade" is an open question. As the
St. Louis platform was called free trade
platform and GROVER CLEVELAND a free
trade candidate, their plurality of 100000
certainly has a significance which
makes very strongly against the Ledger's
assumption.
The Ledlqer also saws:
The other argument used by the class of dem
ocrats who make free trade the battle cry of
the party is that 1t is right in principle and that
the party is bette of in defeat on such an Is
sue than to be victorious with any other. That
is high sounding nonsense stilted stuff
Parties are organized to accomplish ends In
order to do so they must be in power. What
political power will the democrats have with
all branches of the general government in the
hands Of the republicans?
The idea that political party should
contend for principles rather than for
place is no doubt preposterous to certain
order of minds. Parties are certainly COR
ganized to accomplish ends" but OF
what avail if these very ends are sacrificed
that power may be secured What matters
it whether the democratic party is in
power or not, if it only gets power in or
der to abuse it as the republican party
does, for the perpetuation OF monstrous
and wicked policy of taxation in the in
| terest of a favored few In a free gov
eminent the party of opposition has i'm
portant functions as well as the party of
administration. The democratic party
has been in power only four years out of
the last twenty-eight, but since 1874 at
least, it has been an active and potent fac
tor in our government, and Of incalcula-
BILE service TO the American people.
Whether it elects the next president or
not. it will continue to fulfill great mis-
sion.
Finally, the Ledger contends that mo
moral sentiments can attach to the tariff
question" Yet the tariff question involves
the question Of the perversion of the tax
ing power-the second highest prerogative
| of the government-into an instrument
for the plumber of the people and the en-
richment of favored class. If no moral
sentiment attaches to a question of this
kind, then nothing that involves the rights
and liberties of man has any ethical
element.
Finally, whether they are right or
wrong, an overwhelming majority OF
the democracy believe that taxation
for other than public purposes
is vicious in principle and works
nothing but evil in practice. Does
the Ledger suppose for one moment that
this great majority will ever again allow
itself to be wheedled or bullied by an in
significant but noisy minority into support
ing platform which avows or comedies
| that taxation for other than public pur-