The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1892-09-20

=
standing room was occupied.
The vast audience waited full hour
before the speakers appeared. When the
applause that greeted their appearance
ceased the meeting was declared opened
by Chairman Pearsall, Of the campaign
committee, who introduced as chairman
Of the evening ex-Congressman William
j. Ooombs. Mr.. Coombs' speech was
yBy brief. Mr.. Coomhs said that the
6rst speaker of the evening needed no
more introduction than the phrase He is
O eDemocrat." Cries of Hill. Hillr hero
greeted him, and he sat down while New
forks senator arose and stood with smil-
ing features as the audience showered
applause upon him. The senator's voice
was low and calm as he began, but he
gradually warmed up, and before min
ute had passed he had uttered d phrase
that carried wild applause with it. He
spoke in substance as follows:
Senator Hills Speech.
lam reminded Of the fact that It was in this
sdiflce upon a memorable occasion in 1895 that
I bad the honor of expressing to the intrepid
democracy of Kings county the sentiment,
Il am Democrat" and under the existing
POlitical situation know of no more appro-
hriate place or presence than here TO declare
convention, and am Democrat still.
The national Democratic convention OF 1899
has passed into history with its record, its
triumphs and its disappointments. The wis
oom OF Its action Is not now to be questioned.
Its decision will he accepted with loyal ac-
Auiescence by every true and patriotic Demo-
e1At. From this time forth imperative duties
ArO imposed upon us. fractional appeals
eAsould now cease, the spirit of resentment
should oe abandoned, state pride should be
- WnbOrdinAted o the pnn nrf IA
cted grievances should be dismissed, personal
HmbitiOn should be sacrificed and individual
hisappointments should be- forgotten in this
great emergency, which demands from us all
tho exhibition of a widespread and lofty party
patriotism.
Permit mo TO repeat what l had the honor
edexpressng 10 the Tnmmany society on the
Fourth of July last, before the echoes of our
national convention had scarcely died away,
a. follows: "Our course at the present time
4f plain. In the approaching struggle the
Democracy of New York should present q
9oaid front to the enemy. Loyalty to the car
dinal Democratic principles and 10 regularly
nominated candidates Is the supreme duty of
the hour" reiterate those sentiments now.
The Party Differences.
We are entering upon the twenty seventh
presidential election since the organization of
Our government. The good citizen desirous
Of dlscharging his full duty in this crisis, nc-
eording to his conscience and his Judgment,
cover two great parties arrayed against each
ether, struggling for the control of the govern
ment and appealing to the people for their suf-
fmges.
II l were asked TO define the one funda-
mentnl difference between the two parties I
should state that one believes in a strict con-
StEuction of the federal constitution and the
siher in loose one, Ono party believes that
me general governments powers should he
confined to those which are specifically
granted, and that nothing can be- done under
The general welfare clause except the ex-
sroise of those functions which are incidental
and necessary to the carrying out of the ex-
dressed powers, while the other believes that
ander that clause the powors of congress are
substantially unrestricted and limited only by
Cts wise discretion.
This radical diversity Of views cannot we'll
b reooncilea. II cannot be wholly decided by
Che courts, as 1t involves the spirit more than
eAe lettor Of the constitution, and in the end
must be determined largely as a matter of
policy by the people themselves in their SOW
sragn capacity. Starting out with different
views of the constitution, the two parties
AAturally have enunciated different theories
Of government, especially upon the all i'm
portant subject of Federal taxation. A di-
vision upon the tariff question was newt
able.
Concisely stated, what Is the position of the
two parties upon this question: | desire to
sthto It fairly. The Republi. an party advo-
nAtes the doctrine that the government has a
constitutional as we'll moral right to i'm
pose tariff duties for the purpose of encourage
Ing the building up of private industries by
The imposition OF duties sufficiently large to
prevent foreign competition, irrespective of the
question of the needs of the treasury while
the Democratic party believes that the govern
nent has only constitutional and moral
right to impose such duties as may be neces-
sAry to raise sufilcient revenue to support the
government economically administered. This
Il the precise issue squarely stated.
True Fua ctions of Government.
Both parties cannot be right. One or the
ether must bo wrong. The consideration OF
this subject leads to an analysis OF tie true
functiSns of government. There are some
things whicl must bo conceded because they
are too plain for argument, aud one of them is
that the government has no constitutional
power to enter into private business directly,
and what 1t cannot do directly 1t ought not to
do Indirectly. This is the correct theory Of
government, and 1t excludes the idea that cit
liens nnny be burdened to foster other citizens
private schemes.
A protective tariff is unconstitutional. The
Democratic national platform gives forth
no uncertain sound upon this subject, and
correctly states the true position of tho party.
N denies the constitutional power or the gov
ernment to impose taxes for other than
--publlc purposes.
am aware that a concerted effort is being
made by our opponents to make IL appear
tnat new departure has been entered upon,
and that our party has abandoned Its former
conservative position upon the tariff question
ana assumed another and bolder attitude
leading absolutely toward free trade do
not SO regard It,. Some of us might have pre-
ferred little different phraseoiogy, but as a
whole 1t sufficiently expresses our position
with reasonable clearness and accuracy.
Mr.. Hill then proceeded at length to
discuss the unconstitutionality of the
existing tariff law, denouncing it as a
perversion of the powers of government
and dangerous exercise of authority.
lie proceeded as follows:
Tariff for Revenue Only.
Incidental protection. on the other hand, is
objectionable. Tariffs should be imposed for
the express purpose of revenue, and not for
any private purpose We believe in revenue
with incidental protection and not protection
with incidental revenue. AS far as tho tariff
10 necessary to meet the necessities of the gov
ernment It may be imposed, and any other
benefit which may be legitimately derived
from Its imposition may and does necessarily
=. accompany