The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-04-25
GROOM ron THE LEPER.v

democratic politicians who were formerly
among his admirers. 1t is well known
that the principal opposition to Mr..
Cleveland in the last national convention
originated in congress. and especially in
the senate. and that this opposition
crystalized about Hill as the most avail
able opponent Nevertheless Hills re-
tanners in congress now may be counted
on ones fingers. In a recent letter the
Washington correspondent of the St
Louis Republic says:
In the house and senate those who
are most violently opposed to Mr.. Cleve-
land, and who have. since the veto Of
the seigniorage bill. denounced him most
bitterly, are today turning their abuse
upon the New York senator. and giving
the president great benefit in comparison
with Hill. They say that while they are
not very good Cleveland men, they are
better Cleveland men than Hill men.
and thank their stars they We're not
driven into supporting Hill as a national
leader two years ago.
That this statement is correct is shown
by numerous assurances Of democratic
congressman that they give no adherence
" NH views n recent oile VI bAAe-'S -
Senator Daniels's statement to one Of his
Virginia constituents:
/ am for passing the tariff bill at the
first possible moment, and l am not in
sympathy with the speech Of Senator
Hill. ] am very uneasy as to the situa-
ton: but the true democrats are doing
all in their power to expedite results.
Hill stands practically alone in but
one respect does he still hold alliance
with anything that calls itself democratic
or independent, and that is the question
of the income tax. The corpora ton press
Of the East clings to him as the defender
of the moneyed classes in this matter
but few of these papers express any lik-
ing for him even as colleague. Occa-
sionally some one of them that ought TO
know better attempts to defend even his
tariff principles on account of gratitude
for his present service. For example,
the Philadelphia Press says:
Perhaps the most striking feature was
the ability and the breadth of view he
exhibited. Mr.. Hill has been regarded
as an adroit crafty and rather unscrupu-
lOus politician and has not received credit
for intellectual ability of high order.
This speech mas given the country new
conception of his mental force and grasp.
Yet to close observers il was less sur
prising than to the casual reader. on
one or two previous occasions Mr.. Hill
has shown the same kind of talent. His
speech at Brooklyn was by all odds the
ablest and the most persuasive made on
the democratic side in the last presiden-
tial campaign. 1t was a logical, moderate
and effective. if not convincing, preSen-
tation of cOnVerSative democracy His
recent speech harmonizes with the ground
he then took. and both serve to make
him the foremost representative of that
sort of democracy which would modify
our tariff legislation without destroying
existing conditions.
Nothing could be more untrue or alb
surd. We have shown heretofore that
the New York "snap" delegation voted
as a unit for the radical Neal-Watter-
son substitute for the original tariff plank
in the platform of 1892. and that the
entire Hill following did likewise. 1t
was and is notorious that Hill controlled
the New York delegation absolutely.
But Mr. Hills position on the tariff at
that time does not rest on inference. In
the brooklyn speech, to which the Press
refer Mr.. Hin read that tariff plank to
his audience and said:
I am not here to apologize for that
plank. I am here to advocate and de-
fend it. II correctly and substantially
states the democratic faith.
And further than this, in defending the
previous action of the democratic houses
of representatives. which are also in
dorsed by that tariff plank. he said:
The Mills bill of 1888 and the separ-
ate tariff bills passed by the present
democratic house of representatives indi-
cate in a general way the democratic
position. They show, % that the ne
cessaries of life should be substantially
free; C0 that luXuries should bear
the heaviest burdens; CO that there
should be free raw materials for the
benefit Of our manufacturers; "a that
the tariff upon manufactured articles
should, as a general rule, be larger
where similar articles are manufactured
in this country than where they are
not.
And again, not satisfied with these
explanations and illustrations of demo-
cratic policy. Mr.. Hill made this defni-
tien of his own:
Concisely stated, what is the position
of the two parties upon this question?
l desire to state it fairly. The republican
party advocates the doctrine that the
government has the constitutional as
we'll as the moral right TO impose tariff
duties for the purpose of encouraging
the building up of private industries by
the imposition of duties sufficiently large
to prevent foreign competition, irrespec-
tive of the question of the needs of the
treasury; while the democratic party
believes that the government has only
a constitutional and moral right to inn
pose such duties may be necessary
to raise sufficient revenue to support the
government economically administered.
This is the precise issue squarely stated.
With these express statements of tariff
reform principles on record, in print,
where they cannot be denied or evaded.
1t is little less than imbecillty to say that
this mans position then "harmonizes'
with his present declaration that a re-
duction of the tariff means a reduction
of American wages. His present posi-
ton harInonizes with but one thing. and
that is this declaration in the republican
platform Of 1892: i
on all imports coming into competi-
ton with the products Of American labor
there should be levied duties equal 10
the difference between wages abroad
and at home.
It is worse than imbecility to say that
his position in 1892 can be reconciled with