Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1890-10-30
Election next Tuesday
WHERE THE CHOICE LIES.

l
between the general appeals made b.
the two great parties for popular suppor
this year. Republicanism stands TO
American principles which have beeI
satisfactorily tested by National ex
perience. Protection is no longer /;
theory; it is a demonstrated condition
of National prosperity and industria
development. In the times of Hamilton
and Clay the argument in favor of in
dustrial independence and high tariff
was largely based on assumptions which
had not been proved. During the last
thirty years American experience has
supplied the proof. The United States
under Protection has established manu-
factures, diversified industries, and made
advances in material prosperity on a
scale unknown elsewhere in modern
times. To this experience Republicans
ism conlidentially appeals in justifying
the maintenance and development of
American principles of Protection.
Democracy can not dispute the ma
terial facts of unexampled National
progress under the existing economic
policy; but it undertakes to provide for
the country larger measure of pros
perity under a lower tariff offering an
inferior degree of protection against
foreign industries and European labor
1t demands an abatement of the extreme
doctrine of Protection as successfully
taught and practiced during the last
three decades. 1t advocates an aband-
onment of the American principles of
Hamilton, Clay and Greeley. 1t contends
that, wonderful as have been the
achievements of the Nation in debt
paying and extraordinary as is the
industrial development East, West and
South, progress would have been more
remarkable if the economic system had
been less American and more English
in its principles. Its appeal to the
country against Republicanism and
Protection is grounded, not on American
during the last thirty years,
but on English experience under Free
Trade.
Let it be conceded that English pros
do hnc
great, Notwithstanding the ruin of its
agricultural industries, the destitution
and low wages prevailing in manufac- |
turing centres, and the compulsory
emigration of hundreds of thousands of |
artisans and laborers. Does it follow
that English experience is more valuahlet
than American experience in determin- /
ing the future policy of the United
States. Let it be granted that Free
Trade has been successful in England |
owing to its insular position, limited |
area and shipping facilities as the centre
of a world wide Empire. Does it follow
that the same policy, or any approach to
it, is to be favored in the United States
with it's continental domain and the
diverse conditions of its industrial
development? Are American principles
to be abandoned in the light of English
experience? Or is American experience
to be made the ground for continuing
and perfecting an economic system
under which unexampled progress has
been achieved?
Republicanism in the approaching
elections stands for principles which
lave been tested on American soil.
Democracy finds its justification for
English theories in the facts of English
experience. That is one of the chief
distinctions between the policies recon-
nended by the rival groups of political
eaders in Congress. The triumph of
Democracy will be recognized abroad as
! victory for English industrial interests.
The reelection of Republican Con-
,ress will be victory for American s
deas, and will be followed by lamenta-
ion throughout England. What Amer
cans are now called upon to decide for {
is whether their own princi- !
lies and exerience are not worth more |
o them than another nations theory
nd practice.