Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1894-05-29
MAsu1NGroN. MA 18. 18e4.

WAsHINGToN, MAY 10, 1894.
G. ". Boyer, Esq. Editor Statesman,
0fartinsburg. W. Va.
My DEAR iR:-Your favor of a
recent date. copy of which en-
close, has been duly received.
/ fully concur in your suggestion
that it is the right of any Democrat
in our State to ascertain directly
from me, if lie so desires, my posi-
ton on all public questions, and the
reasons which influence my actions
as pnblic official.
After the tariff bill had passed the
House and while it WAS before the
Finance Committee of the Senate. /
was invited by that Committee to
come before it, as representative of
my State, and present any views /
deemed proper in the interest of her
people. 1 did so, and stated my
views from the standpoint, as con-
ceived, of a Democrat who had fought
as earnestly as any one to accomplish
the result of the election of 1892 in
our State.
1t is true I suggested to the Com
mittee, that the Wilson bill as it
passed the House reduced the duties
on protected articles about 33 per
cent, that a reduction of the duty on
coal should be made to the same cx-
tent, making the duty on coal about
so cents per ton. But after full con-
sultation the committee decided that
it would be proper to reduce it even
more than that, and fixed the rate at
40 cents per ton-one of the lowest
duties in the tariff schedules, being
about twelve and one half per cent.
ad valorem.
believed then, as am compelled
to believe now, that acted in per-
feet harmony and accord with the
policy and declaration of the Dem
ocratic partY) for the following rea-
sons.
First.-For fifty years coal has
been upon the dutiable list.
Second. Morrison revision,
and the Mills bill (the latter adopted
and approved by the National Dem
ocratic Convention provided for a
duty upon this article.
Third Every representative of
the Democratic party that 1 heard
speak, myself included, in discussing
the platform of 1892 before the peo-
pie of West Virginia. declared that
the success of the Democratic party
did not mean " free coal. f." hut it
would have to stand its equitable re-
duction with all other articles upon
the dutiabIe list. This regarded as
n pledge to the people, made in the
hour of our greatest extremity in a
contest for Democratic principles, in
which we sought TO lessen the bur-
dens of taxation, and I was unwilling
to violate it in the hour of victory,
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 a narrow strip on the New Eng
land coast, where it would come in
competition with the Nova Scotia
coal, and those persons were given,
under the provisions of this bill,
what considered high rate of pro-
lection upon their manufactured pro-
ducts.
Fifth.-Out of the $4,000 square
miles embraced within the bounda-
ries of our State, 10000 square miles
are underlaid with bitumous coal,
and for q time, (and only for tune,
in my iudgment) a temporary scare
resulting from placing coal on the
free list, would, as it has already
done, affect the sale of every acre of
coal land owned by the farmers of
our State.
Upon this question do not wish
to be misunderstood. l am honestly
of the opinion that this depression
in the price of lsnd in the State re-
suIting from free coal. would have
been but temporary, and have disap-
peared in two or three years, and
that we could compete with the Nova
Scotia mines, even though they had
a much shorter haul and water in
stead of rail transportation.
This temporary scare, would, in my
Judgment, have seriously affected at
the November election, the suprem-
acy Of the Democratic patty in West
Virginia, and if, as / feared, such
would have been its result, it might
have changed the political complex
ion~of the Senate, one of the branches
of the National Legislature. DURING
the term OF Democratic admins
tration.
Sixth.-Believing this, and con-
scious that no political principle NJ
the party war involved, because the
doctrine of'free raw materially rests
upon the idea that if raw material
is EXCHANGED in price by duty upon
it, then the article in the mapufar-
ture of which it is a part must re-
ceive higher duty than would 9TH
erwise be necessary, was not in
volved, for l knew that this was mt
the case with coal, as the tariff on
no manufactured article would he
either raised or lowered by placing
it on the free or dutiable list. felt
therefore that violated neither
Democratic policy nor precedent in
assuming the position did, and as
q proof OF the correctness of this
view, when the Senate bill was re-
ported with coal on the dutiable list.
manufactured products, especially
on the wooden schedule, were reduced
even below the duties provided by