Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1892-09-29
"LIKE IPECAC."

Cleveland Leader.
Thomas Hart Benton once said that
while he sat ia the convention that
nominated James Buchanan for the
Presidency and listened to the applause
that greeted the different planks Of the
platform he asked one of the vociferous
cIaquers show he could swallow such
stuff" alike ipecac, to be thrown up
again." was the laconic answer. That
is the way David Bennett Hill swallowed
the late Chicago platform. He declared
unequivocally, "A protective tariff is
unconstitutional" Then he devoted
nearly two columns of his speech to
prove that protection is not unconstitu-
tional and can not be dispensed with
without inflicting grievous and IRE
parable wrong upon both capital and
labor. He said protection is unconsti-
tutional," but "incidental protection is
unobjectionable;" that tariffs should be
imposed for "the purpose OF revenue
only." and that "the tariff imposed upon
all manufactured articles should equal
the difference between the rate of wages
paid in this and foreign countries so far
as labor enters into the cost of produc
tion." Here he disgorged the ipecac
completely, and threw up the unconstl-
tutional plank that he had just swallow
ed. He cast tariff for revenue only" to
one side and said it was Democratic to
favor a tariff so arranged and adjusted
as to protect American labor against the
cheap labor of Europe. The next step
in the process of disgorging the nausea
ting ipecac brought out the following
declaration from the distinguished Dem
ocrat:
IfIwere asked to define as concisely
as possible the whole Democratic policy,
1 should state it substantially as follows:
"We favor tariff for revenue only,
limited to the necessities of the govern
ment, economically administered, and so
adjusted in its application, as far as
practicable, as to prevent unequal bur
dens, encourage productive industries al
home, afford just compensation TO labor.
but not to create or foster monopolles.
A tariff framed to encourage produc-
tive industries at home and afford just
compensation to labor" is protection and
Mr.. Hill says ''protection is unconstltu-
tional." The Democratic national plat
form says "protectiou is unconstltutlon-
al" and it was adopted in the convention
by a vote of 564 to 1862. The platform
committee reported plank declaring
that "any change of law must be at every
step regardful of the labor and capita!
involved" This the convention rejected
as "unconstitutional." Hill rejects II
and then swallows it, and the Democracy
thus appears divided upon the one great
issue of the campaign. But this inter
pretation of the gospel of Democracy
according to Hill is splendid acrobatic
performance. Starting with the Chicago
platform he gave an unequaled exhibit
tion of high and lofty tumbling and
double bareback riding, only pauslng
when both feet were planted upon the
force bill. He has not cleared away any
of the obstacles that Mr.. Cleveland will
encounter in his letter af acceptance.
In fact, in affirming mildly that "pro-
lection is unconstitutional" and declar-
ing with emphasis that he thinks the
tariff should "encourage productive in
lustries at home and afford just CON-
oensation to labor" he muddles the
muddle, confuses the confusion, adds
another snarl to the Democratic tangle'
and makes the honest men of his party
stare with wonderment, and ask "What
ire Democratic principles?"
We now await with anxiety an ex-
position of the Democracy according to
Grover, to be given in his long-expected
letter of acceptance.