South Branch intelligencer. [volume] (Romney, Va. [W. Va.]) 1830-1896, 1892-05-20

think that in 1888 Mr.. Cleveland
lost votes In those States bccau so OF
his courageous and honest course
IN refusing to sanction what YOU
rightly term fraudulent Federal
pensions ~ i notice that you de.
nounoc the pensions, but also no.
ticc that you have not one word of
commentator for Mr.. Cleveland
who. although Northern man,
firmly prevented the payment OF
hundreds Of fraudulent pensions.
You allege that 'shis foolish veto of
the River and Harbor bill, one of
the most liberal passed by Congress
Tor many years, gave great offense
to many Of his followers in thus
State" Did you ever examine that
bill, Judge, to see whether, besides
being s1iberal" it was not waste
fnl, whether it was not purposoly
made wasteful by Republican SEN
ate 7 1t it was wasteful, tell us
what ought he to have done p,
Should he have signed it with that
belief? May / be SO far personal
as to ask you whether you would
have done so with that belief?
May l also ask you from what
source you got your information
that his vote gave great offenso to
his followers in this State? The
retnrns from the three Congression-
al districts upon Underwater, in this
State, show that in each of them
the Democratic vote was larger in
1888 than in 1884. They also show
that while in the Second district
the congressional candidate receiy-
ed about ten votes more than Mr..
Cleveland, yet in the First and
Third districts MIR. Cleveland re-
celved more votes than the respec-
tive congressional candidates in
those Districts. Do not such facts
seem to disproTe your assertion ?
INTERNAL REVENUE LAWS.
In your effort to show that Mr..
Cleveland had lost his popularity in
Virginia in 1854 belief on your
part which l submit the returns
above noticed do not justify-you
comment on Mr.. Cleveland's oppo-
sition to the repeal of the internal
revenue laws. Is it not fact that
Mr.. Cleveland held that it was bet
ter to lower the tariff taxes than to
take off the revenue duties upon to.
bacco? Ia it not fact that in
most o. the counties of Virginia
scarcely any tobacco, if any at al,
Is raised 2" Is it not also o fact
that the tariff taxes bear upon every
farmer in every county in this State?
Then will you tell us whether, un-
der such circumstances, Mr.. Clevc-
land was not wise and just when he
held that it was better to reduce the
tariff taxes, which bore upon all,
than to remove the tobacco duties.
which bore upon far fewer people
AN EXPLODED CHARGE.
You also bring up the old charge
that he ought not to have brought
forward the tariff question at the
time he did. You intimate that he
did 80 "merely for the sake of in
strncSing the people in certain
line Of policy" Could you not
imagine his having been influenced
by any higher motive than thlt
Are you not the first one to ascribe
such a motive to him {? Others
have said that it was unwise at
the time, but have they not always
admitted that he so acted because
he thought it was his duty to hasten
the removal of the tariff taxes un-
der which the people were burden
ed? But did 1t ever occur to you
that Mr.. Cleveland could not have
forced the issue upon tho party if
the representatives in congress had
not been in favor of il? The Pres.
ident has no power to Offer a bill,
much less to enact law. Is it not
fact that the tariff issue, as pre-
scnted in 1888, was found in what
was known as the Mills bill, and
not the Presidents message?
But suppose that his message did
hasten the conflict; did it not give
us the issue upon which we gained
in the congressional fight of 1890
80 many Northern and Western
congressman? Do you recall any
Democratic candidate who did not
in that campaign persistenly cite
Mr.. Cleveland as the man WHO had
bravely demanded that the people
should be relieved from the burden
OK tariff taxation? IL that was
true then, it is equally as true now.
You do not know, do you, that
the Western and Northern con
gressmen were elected upon the is-
sue OF the Force bill or fraudulent
pensions? Do you think it would
he wise to arouse the distrust of
tho Northern and Western voters
by refusing TO nominate him who
gave the issue and who, the people
believe, will never see it abandoned
until they have obtained the de-
sired and needed relief? Concede
that the issuance OF his message
may have been o temporary mis-.
take, but shall not our party make
a greater one IL we refuse to seize
the present advantage which it
gives as? Will the people have as