The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1892-11-03

| mate effect. School houses are erected i, ,b.
interest or public education and not to henef,
| t tieeI or square upon which they may be
| Dca'eo although that effect NAV follow.
| ota'e taxes are collected for the naintenane.
| y. our PUBIC schools, and not for the Durnoss
| ol either injuring or aiding private schools
| so also We may safely conclude that tariff.
shooid be Imposed for the direct purpose OF
. erehue only ana not TO build up private for.
| tunes, or even for the laudable purpose of in.
| cfeasing the wages of private citizens What
| ever the indirect eject of such tariffs NAV he
| their benehclaries welcome to If and nc
| one else is wrCnged
Inc democratic position is safe logical
conservative and just position. No tariffs ex.
| cepl Tor the purposes of revenue only.n and
then limited to the necessities of the povern-
men. honestly and economically administered
Is a doctrine which appeals 20 the good sense
ana sound judgment Of every honest and
thoughtful man. With the constantly increas.
ing expenses OF government and the enormous
amount OF money, annually aupmenting re
qufed by The growing pension list these tar
ms "LIch must necessarily be exacted TO meet
these expenditures will be for many wears to
coiiie AMPLY suliIcIent to afford, incidentally
ali tho protection which the most ardent adj
Hocdte OF the system can reasonably ask More
tnah TINS ought not to be conceded to ANYBODY
III tne imposition Of necessary tariffs there
should be exercised wise discrimination i,
The amounts exacted and in the articles taxed
list nd
"Eht should be the most heavily burdened ra
questions not free from difficulty and recrira
thc most careful consideration. When tho
democratic party says that il favors a tariff
lor revenue ONLY it means that the proner
main, and only lawful direct purpose of the
tar1h Is the raising of revenue alone: but tins
logical and correct position does not conflict
With the ldea of such incidental advantages as
may also be necessarily and inevitably received
from revenue tariff The indirect benefit
cannot well be avoided and we do not seek tn
prevent 1t, bat desire to facilitate it aud render
IL eHectual by the exercise of proper dis
elimination. We do not mean that in tho
framing of tariff legislation our one aim should
DC 10 TAX Such articles will produce thu
greatest amount of revenue and shutting our
eyes to all other considerations Extreme men
may assume that position upon their own re-
sponslbllty but they do not represent the
party.
1t is impracticable to insert a schedule of
tariff duties in a national platform, and there
fore the principles which should govern the
adjustment of the details of the tariff can bet
ter be ascertalned from the tariff legislation
which the party proposes. The Mills bill CT
1883 and the separate tariff bills passed by the
present Democratic house of representatives
indicate In a general way the Democratic posi-
ton i
They show: l. That the necessaries of life
should be substantially free. 2 That luxuries
should bear the heaviest burdens g. That
there should be free raw materials far III,
benefit of our manufacturers. 4. That the tar
If upon manufactured articles should as a
general rule be larger where similar articles
are manufactured in this country than where
they are not. j. That the tariff imposed uDon
all manufactured articles (other than those
which for good reasons placed on the free
hsD should equal the difference between tho
rate of wages paid in this and foreign coun-
tries so far as labor enters into the cost of
their production.
President Harrison. in his ingenious letter of
acceptance, endeavOrs to place our party in a
false attitude by calling attention to the fact
that While our platform in 1874. rcadoDted in
l6S6, contained an express plank upon this
question of the equalization Of wages yet it
was omitted in 1892, and asserts that we have
changed our position. beg to ti!Tcr with Linn
There has been change. 1t is not always
practicable 10 place in a platform the details O:
proposed legislation.
The platforms Of ISIS were elaborate and
lengthy, and it was desirable to simplify them.
General principles were stated in 1882 rather
than particulars as in 1884. There is no con-
fct between them. There was no necessity
for the repetition of that plank, as the partv's
position upon it had been evidenced by the
Mills bill. which had not been Passed before
the national conventions of iS4 and 1888 we're
held Parties are to he judged as much by
their records as by their p:atgo forms. We stand
not only Upon cur platform of 1892 but upon
the Mills bill which WAS the latest general
Democratic legislation upon the tariff subject
That bill was as good an exposition of our prIll-
cipleS as any ella borate platform could pos,!-
bly, be.
Now what did the Mills bill disclose Upon
the question of the equalization of waresl |
make the statement, and challenge contra
diction of its truth, that there was not a single
manufactured article mentioned in that bill
upon which the duty reduced, upon which
he nj StJ l.4ft I,,t1
resent the difference in wages paid in this and
foreign countries for the labor in volved III it.
production. | can safely go further and "a :
that in many instances the duty permitted It.
remain exceeded this difference in wages
three, four and five times. Therefore our rn-
sitlon upon this question is clear as the
MONDAY sun, and it required no special plank
in the platform to emphasize ia We Delie>e
IN the encouragement Of labor and are DESTROYS
of protecting its interests in every reasonah.
way consistent with the rights Of the whole
people, We would not raise dollar Of uri-
necessary revenue or needlessly increase the
tariff single penny for the express purpose Of
building up private industries, but in main
tanning the duties which must necessarily be
collected We would discriminate in favor of
American labor and American industries.
If | were asked to define as concsely as pos
sihle the whole Democratic policy / should
state it substantially as follows I'VE favor a
tariff for revenue only, limited to the neceSSi-
ties of the government, economically admins
tered, and so adjusted in its application. as far
as practicable. as to prevent unequal burdens, |
encourage productive industries at home and |
afford just compensation. to labor, but not to
create or foster monopoies." These are the |
cardinal principles upon which the details of |
all tariff legislation should be based.
Our opponents profess to be much disturbed |
because we have in our plat form denounced |
"Repuhlican protection" as fraud. What else |
is it? 1t is fraud for these conclusive reasons:
!. 1t is secured by palpable abuse of the tax
ing power of tie government ,. 1t inures to |
4 haab of fatS fl,ax
many. 5. 1t is based upon favOrtism of the |
worst species. 4. It tends to create fictitious
ness depression; 5. 1t is deceptive in its prom
Uses and unsatisfactory in its results. 6. Its |
principal benct:ciarics constitute privileged !
class, and their opportunities for governmental |
aid lead to public scandal and decentralization. |
President Harrison and all the other great
and small sad OF tbs h v1clous system
the Democratic party has assumed holder |
attitude than formerly, and become an advo-
coed in their strenuous efforts to place us in
false position. 1t does not follow because
are opposed TO an unreasonable tariff that we
favor free trade and the abolition of all Gus
tom houses We opposed to prohibit
DRY tariff. We are opposed to placing vir-
tuai Chinese wall around the country to
We favor a larger commerce and wider mar
kets than at present exist. We are opposed to
1ud m P
We favor lesiN lation for the masses and not
for the classes; We favor the protection, of
labor and not The creation of monopolies. We
would encourage and foster labor by relieving
1t of all unnecessary burdens.
said in the campaign of 1888 in my opening
speech at the Academy of Music, in New York
city, that if | believed that the Democratic
party favored absolute free trade should not
advocate lis cause. and repeat the statement
here tonight. Permit nae in this connection to
read letter written by in 1891 to a certain
mass meeting in New York, which. to my sur
prise, had been invited TO address. 1t is as
follows:
ALBANY. April |. 1891.
Louis F. Post. Esq, President. etc.
DEAR SIR am in receipt OF your favor Of
March % inviting me to attend free trade
mass meeting to be held at Cooper union on
evening, April2. While thanking
you for your courtesy. | cannot attend the
meeting. because | have no sympathy with its
purpose. | had supposed that my
opinions upon the tariff question had been SO
frequently expressed in public that nobody
could expect me consistently TO attend meet
ing intended to promulgate the doctrine of
free trade. | am not an advocate of free trade
and never have been | stand with the Demo-
cratic party in favor of tariff reform, which
means reduction of the present excessive and
q o->l bn