Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1894-05-28
gENATOR EAULENER on DEE TARIFE


Boyer, editor OF the Msrtinsburg
Statesman, Hon. c. J. Faulkner has
written the following letter, which was
published in last weeks Statesman:
WASHINGTON, May ls,1s94.
c. W. Boyer, Esq, Editor States
man." MGrttnSblrg, W. Ia. My DEAR
SIR:-YOur favor OF recent date, copy
OF which enclose, has beer duly re-
ceived.
l fully concur in your suggestion
that IL is the right Of any Democrat in
our State 10 ascertain directly from me,
II be so desires, my position on all pub
lie questions, and the reasons which in
fuence my actions as a public official.
After the tariff bill had passed the
House and while IL was before the FL
nance Committee OF the Senate, was
invited bY that Committee 10 come be-
fore IL, IS a representative Of my State,
and present any views l deemed proper
In the interests of her people. did so,
and stated my views from the stand
point ss l conceived, Of Democrat
who had fought as earnestly as any one
TO accomplish the result Of the election
Of 1892 in our State.
IL is true suggested to the commit
tee, that the Wilson bill as IL passed the
House reduced the duties on protected
articles about 80 per cent, that a re-
duction Of the duty on coal should DO
made to the same extent, making the
duty on coal about so cents per ton.
But after full consultation the commit
tee decided that IL would be proper 70
reduce il even more than that, and
fixed the rate at 40 cents per ton-one
OF the lowest duties In the tariff sched-
uleS, being about twelve aud one-half
per cent al valorem.
/ believed then, as l am compelled
TO believe now that | acted In perfect
harmony aud accord with the policy
aud declarations Of the Democratic
party. for the following reasons:
First-FOr fifty years coal has been
upon the dutiable list.
Second-The Morrison revision and
the Mills bill 1.-THE latter adopted and
approved by the National Democratic
Convsntion) provided for duty upon
this article.
Third-Every representative Of the
Democratic party that / heard speak,
myself included, In discussing the plat
form OF 1892 before the people OF West
Virginia, declared that the success Of
the Democratic party did not mean
free coal, but II would have 10 stand
its equitable reduction with all other
articles upon the dutiable list. This l
regarded as a pledge TO the people,
made In the hour OF Out greatest e&-
tremity in a contest for Democratic
principles, in which we sought TO lessen
the burdens of taxation, and l was I'M
willing TO violate il in the hour Of vic
tory. especially as no criticism was
made when the pledge was given.
FOurth-Whether coal was free or
dutiable would not affect its price to
any class OF consumers in our State,
or in the Union, except those living In
q narrow strip on the New England
coast, where it would come in cOmpeti-
ton with the Nova Scotia coal, and
thoSN, persons were given, under the
prosr.sions of this bill, what l considered
q high rate Of protection upon their
manufactured products.
Fifth-Out OF the $4,000 square miles
embraced within the boundaries OF our
State, 16, 600 square miles are underlaid
with bituminOus coal, and for time
I land only for time, in my Judgment
= temporary scare, resulting from plac-
ing coal on the free list, would, as IL has
already done, affect the sale Of every
acre of coal land owned by the farmers
of our State.
Upon this question l do not wish to
be misunderstood. l am honestly Of
the opinion that this depression in the
price of land in the State resulting from
free coal, would have been but tenn
pOrary, and have disappeared In two
or three years, and that we could COM
pete with the Nova Scotia mines, even
though they had a much shorter haul
and water instead of rail transpOrta-
tion.
This temporary scare, would, in my
Judgment, have seriously affected az
the November election, the supremacy
OF the Democratic party in West Nir-
Rlnia, and il, as I feared, such would
have been its result, 10 might have
changed thu political complexion OF
the Senate one OF the branches Of the
National Legislature, during the term Of
a Democratic administration.
Sl1th-BelieviEg this, and conscious
that no political principle Of the party
was involved, because the doctrine of
free raw materials" rests upon the
idea that IL a raw material is enhanced
20 price bY duty upon il, then the ar
ticles In the manufacture OF which il is
q part must receive a higher duty than
would otherwise be necessary, was not
involved, for l knew that this was not
the case with coal, as the tariff on no
manufactured article would be either
raised or lowered by placing it on the
free or dutiable lisL I felt therefore
that / violated neither Democratic pol
icy nor precedent in assuming the posi-
tion I did, and as a proof OF the correct
ness OF this view. when the Senate bill
was reported with coal on the dUtia6le
list, manufactured products, especially
on the wOOleu schedule were reduced
even below the duties provided by the
House bill.
Seyenth-Tbe duty placed upon coal
Is clearly and 0eyend question a reve-
nue. duty, and by far the lowest duty
ever provided on this article la Demo
cratic tariff.
In reference to my action on this bill,
il is so thoroughly known by my col
leagues In the Senate, that any suggeS-
ton that / have hindered, delayed or
INSTRUCTED IT,, or done otherwise than
support it, both before the Committee
and the Senate, would surprise them.
/ informed the members OF the commit
tee, az my interview with them, that
whatever should be their conclusion
upon this subject they would receive
my earnest support and active cO-opers-
ton Ia the passage OF the measure.
On the 7tn of March last, IN reply 10