New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-09-15

In the Committee on Resolutions OF the Con-
ncciicut Democratic State Convention on Tues
day there was q square stand-up fight on the
plain question whether the party in that state
could afford 20 90 into the campaign as sup
porting the Free Trade plank in the Chicago
platform. Colonel Osborn, of 1.-THE New
Haven Register" an outspoken and sincere
advocate of the doctrine Of Free Trade as en-
bodied in the National platform, presented a
series OF resolutions which would have put the
Connecticut Democracy in line with the party
in the Nation. They have not been published.
We should very much like to see them IN PRINT,
and we call upon Colonel Osborn to give them
10 the public in the popular and wel-conducted
newspaper which he controls. We do not
understand that such publication would be any
violation Of confidence. We do not ask for a
rcport Of the discussion, but simply for the
resolutions which he Is reported to have drawn
I'D and offered FOR the approval of the com
mittee and adoption by the convention. SO
much a. this. at least, is due TO the intelligent
Connecticut voter, who has night TO know
why he is asked 10 vote for Cleveland on a
platform in positive and pronounced disagree
mcnt with the one upon which he was nom
mated. Let the debates be considered as hav-
ing taken place in executive session, or star
chamber. or n Masonic lodge, or anywhere
else whore men may talk freely without being
reported or having their privacy ntruded upon
But the voters do have a right TO know the
terms Of the resolutions which were offered,
discussed. and by a vote-as is reported-oi
1G 70 \ rejected Ii is understood that Colonel
Osborn made a gallant fight in committee.
VIII he tell MS what he was fighting for?
The resolutions adopted were drawn by the
Hon. Alfred t. Burr, of The Hartford Times"
a Democratic editor OF moro than fifty years ex-
pcrence and party leader OF large influence,
whose opinions have always carried great
weight Ii Is no secret that he has never been
in accord with Mr.. Cleveland's extreme views
on the tariff, or with the uttcrances OF the
Chicago Convention on that subject. II is also
well known that that veteran Democrat, ex-
Senator Eaton, has been in perfect agreement
with him. Both are now, and Tor long time
have been, opposed to the Frce-Trade tcnden-
cies of the party and in sympathy with what
was once known as " the Randall wing" of the
Democracy. But, taking the country together,
that has always been feeble faction, and the
logical effect of the action OF the Chicago Con
ycntion was to stamp it out entirely. When
the Chicago Convention deliberately rejected
\ resolution declaring that " in making reduc-
ton in taxes it is not proposed to inJure any
domestic industries, but rather to promote their
healthy growth and that 81 any change of law
must be at every step rcgardful OF the labor
and capital involved" and put in place OF it
donunciation OF Protection aS a " fraud and u
"robbery,n and the declaration AS funda-
mental principle of the Democratic party that
the Federal Government has no constitutional
power to impose and collect tariff duties eX-
ccpt for the purposes of revenue only'-when
the National Convention of the party did this
il left no standing place for any one who favors,
rs Mr. Burr and ex-senator Eaton do. Incl
dental Protection. And yet, under the lead of
these two gentlemen, the Connecticut Demo
Gratis adopted platform Numerically opposed
to what the National Convention declared to
be ga fundamental principle OF the Democratic
partyn And on that they go to the people
asking the support of intelligent voters.
Is it too much to say that this action is dis
honest? The gentlemen who procured the
passage of these resolutions did not hesitate to
say that the State could not be carried for
Cleveland on the Free-Trade platform adopted
at Chicago. But that is the platform on which
he stands before the country. In some locali
ties his chief strength is because of it because
the voters believe that Protection is fraud,
and robbery" and in violation of the Consti-
tuition, and believe that he agrees with them
in this /" fundamental principle" Are they
right? Then how about the Connecticut
voters who are expected to support him be-
cause he stands for " favorable legislation
whether it refey to tobacco leaf or
their other products? One or the other of
these two classes Of voters will be cheated. The
Connecticut Democrats did possibly the best
thing they could to save themselves from over
whelming defeat on the tariff issue. But they