Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1893-11-02

the adjustment of customs duties.
The bill thus framed would be nothing
more or less than protectionist re-
vision of the existing protectionist tar
iff, remedying we trust, some of the
extreme abuses and inequalities of Nc
Kinleyism, but retaining protection as
it's distinctive characteristic. In short,
it would be precisely the tariff bill de-
scribed and called for by the tariff res
olution originally reported to the Chi
cago Convention of 1892. Read that
and observe how we'll it tallies with the
bill now predicted and advocated by
Senator Hill:
1--WE reiterate the oft-repeated doc
trines of the Democratic party, that
the necessity of the government is the
only justification for taxation; that
| when Custom House taxation is levied
| upon articles of any kind produced in
| this country, the difference between
the cost of labor here and abroad, when
such difference exists, fully measures
any possible benefits to labor, and the
enormous additional impositions of the
existing tariff fall with crushing force
upon oar farmers and workingmen,
| and for the mere advantage of the few
| it enriches; exact from labor grossly
unjust share of the expenses of the
Government; and we demand such a
revision of our tariff laws as will re-
fhnin irin,,ifo,,c inn 1tfinc
tighten their expressions, and put them
on a constitutional and equitable basis.
But in making reductions in taxes it is
not proposed to injure any domestic
industries, but rather to promote their
healthy growth. From the foundation
of the Government the taxes collected
at the Custom House have been the
chief source of Federal revenue. Such
they must continue to be. Moreover,
many industries haye come to rely
upon legislation for successful continu-
ance, so that any change of law must
be at every step regardful of the labor
and capital thus involved. The pro-
cess of reform must be subject in the in
execution of this plan to the die
tates of Justice"
We submit to the candor of any mind
the proposition that the sort of tariff
bill here outlined is precisely the tariff
bill now advocated by Senator Hill.
But this protectionist resolution was
not excepted by the Chicago conven-
tion. 1t was wiped out of the plat
form and the party's creed, utterly and
absolutely; not by any parliamentary
accident, not blindly and without ap-
probation of the significance of its re-
lection, but deliberately, intelligently,
and Intentionally, after full discus
sion OF the merits of the resolution and
the merits of the proposed substitute.
The proposed resolution as printed
above was denounced in open conven-
ton as Republican doctrine, not Dem
ocratic; it was contemptuously referr-
ed to as '.straddle;" it was described
as monstrosity. And then the Con-
vention, by the overwhelming majori-
ty of 564 to 352, repudiated the docs
trine now advocated by Senator Hill,
and substituted, the ''simple. lucid, and
true" declaration which follows:
1--WE denounce Republican protec-
majority of the American people for
the benefit of the few. We declare it |
to be fundamental principle of the
Democratic party that the Federal
Government has no constitutional pow
er to impose and collect tariff duties |
except for the purpose of revenue on
ly; and we demand that the collection |
of such taxes shall be limited to the |
of the Governmet honestly |
and economically administered.
Why, then, we ask, does Senator
Hill lend the great influence of his
voice to an attempt to revive the re-
jected and emphatically repudiated
doctrine that customs duties may con-
be imposed with view to
the protection of American industry,
Or to affording stimulus to American
Why does he abandon
,he platform on which the campaign
vas fought and the election won, AMI
'eturn to the repudiated teachings of
he earlier days before the Democracy
Jared to take this decisive step? How
IAN he stand before a Democratic aud
euce and discuss with federation, much
ess with approval, the possibility OF
he enactment of tariff bill which
ives the lie to fundamental article |.
# the Democracy's faith? How can he
proposal to tear up the
,latform of 1892, and to violate the :
'ledge upon which the Democracy was .
eturned to powera How can Senator
I'LL, calling himself Democrat, pro-
lain himself protectionist and adyo- :
ate protectionist legislation by a DEM
cratic Congress?
There is some talk just now about
ishonest compromises and cowardly
Senator Hill has forcibly
expressed his contempt for compromis-
rs and the makers of shifts when a
uestion of principle Is involved. Yet
o compromise that has been suggest
d in the way of a conditional repeal =
"A