St. Paul daily globe., 1894-07-21

etter may tend to bear that construc-
ton. 1t was not tha. bold. ringing and
explicit declaration in favor of the plat
form which his party had right to eX-
pect, but was regarded by many as
timid, cautious and conservative; but,
whether this criticism is or is not we'll
founded, the fact remains that he had
no power or authority to change or alter
one line or sentences of the national
platform. which had been deliberately
adopted at the national convention duly
assembled. No president can be above
his party. No president can dictate to
his party, No president can change his
party's platform. But no matter what
idea it may be claimed was intended to
be conveyed in his letter Of acceptance
in mitigation or modification of the
platform, there can be no doubt as to
the presidents position at the present
time on the essential principle of free
raw material. Let me read from that
remarkable letter of the president
which was yesterday submitted to the
house of representatives. 1t expresses
better than can hope TO do the true,
sound and logical position of the Demo-
cratic party upon this question"
After reading extracts from this letter,
Mr.. Hill went OIL as follows:
"Mr. President. approve every word
that have quoted. 1t is an honest and
manly statement of the true attitude
which the party should assume in this
crisis. | am not required to defend the
of icdC of ~ trl-
ton of this letter at this particular time.
1t may have been indiscreet. 1t may
operate as a irebrand TO spread the
flames of discord already kindled among
party friends, honestly differing, as l
am disposed to concede, upon questions
of public and party policy. 1t may
widen the breach already existing in
this senate. and in that view it may be
regarded as unfortunate and lll-adviscd.
1t was
A TIME FOR DIPLOMACY,
craftsmanship and conciliation, rather
than recriminatiou, denunciation and
arraignment. But aside from the queS-
tion OF Its mere eXpediency, am here
to defend the presidents letter In so far
as it demands that the patty shall not
be led aStray into the violation of Dem
ocratic pledges and principles. Upon
the question of free raw materials the
president is right, aud you know it.
You cannot answer his argument; you
cannot successfully dispute his PROPOSE
ton. You cannot doubt his sincerity
and patriotism. You must yield in the
end to his views. You cannot stand up
against the sentiment of the great Dem
ocratic masses of the country, which
will rally around the president in his
contest with you uDon this particular
branch of the subject. The time to
yield is now, before there is further
humiliation, embarrassment and dis
cord. Mr.. President. having demon.
strated that the true Democratic
theory of revenue reform requires
that free raw materials should
be its distinguishing feature. let US
next inquire what is the con-
dition which now contronts US. The
senate bill which has been prepared
violates this Democratic theory, and,
while it reduces the duty OH coal, iron
ore, lead and some other raw materials,
from those imposed under the Mckinley
law. and in that respect is CONNIE enda-
BILE, it nevertheless imposes some duties
| thereon. and therefore fails TO redeem
| our pledges. 1t is not a Question of the
amount of duties that may be levied; a
| question of principle is involved, and a
| penny'S duty violates our promises, and
that places us In false position. As
| the president well says, there can be no
compromise on matter of this char
acter, where vital principle is at
stake. The house of representatives,
fresh from the people, which represents
more distinctly aid peculiarly than we
do the taxing power Of the people, re-
pudiates our Dill, and Democratic
! president has
EMPHASIZED THAT REPUTATION,
and the condition which confrontS US Is
one of extreme embarrassment. Shall
we retreat or advance? Shall we sur
render to the house while we can do so
honorably, or shall we wait till we are
driven to it? In the light of the letter
of the president, the house cannot hon.
orably retreat. 1t has no other alterna.
tive except TO insist upon its bill where
in it provides for free raw materials.
The president cannot approve the sen.
ate bill after what he has said in this re.
markabe letter tie arralgns the sen.
ate, and intimates that the enactment
Of the senate bill means party
perfdy and party dishonor.' These
are strong words, which the pres.
ident of the United States would
not use towards measure which he
ever expected afterwards to approve
This letter, unusual and unprecedented
in its character and method of promul-
CATION though it may be, nevertheless
clearly foreshadows veto of the senate
bill, even if the house should finally
concur i'll our amendments. What per-
son would expect the president to ap-
prove the senate bill after its vigorous
and scathing Remuneration contained in
his letter? You would think less oil
him for his glaring Inconsistency. No
this letter is consistent. 1t is bold
vigorous, even If imprudent, letter. i
means war to the knife against the sen
ate bill. 1t juStifieS much that has beer
said against the senate bill during the
last few months; it means that it cal
never receive executive approval; i
means that the senate cannot be per-
mtted to abandon or surrender the
great underlying principles for which
we struggled and lost in 1888, anG
fought and won in 1892.
THE PRESIDENT IS RIGHT.
"There is no middle ground which W.
can occupy. No bill which does no
provide for free raw materials can bl
permitted to become law. 1t is un-
necessary to enter into any argument II
define or designate what articles consti'
tute raw materials. Every Democra
knows what they are. Any article ma.
be considered raw material when it is il
the lowest or crudest form in which i
enters into commerce. This definition
is ample and sufficient, and will redeem
our pledges if 1t is honestly applied
The party platform was for free, no
freer raw materials,as as is now ingenious
} ly contended. IT the president in hi
wisdom had seea fit, while the debat
was progressing in the senate, to hav