Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1894-07-26
WARM DEBATE.
A Lively Scene In the Senate Of
the United States.
aIr. Hin Makes q Remarkable Speech De-
Tending the Presidents Tariff Letter,
to Which sfr. Vest Replies
With Mach yehen1ence.


the conference committee on the tariff
bill being under discussion, Senator
Hill, of New York, spoke with much
feeling. He said:
A theory as well as q condition now con-
fronts US The theory Of the democratic
party Is that in the enactment of tariff legisla-
ton free raw materials should be an essential
and conspicuous element; it is our creed that
the materials which enter into manufact-
ures should be freed from; the burden of tariff
taxation The best interests OF the manu-
faeturers well as the consumers of the land
demand the recognition of this wise discrim-
nation We are committed to this side Of the
question, and we cannot retreat and we cannot
retract. We are honorably bound to redeem
our professions and promises. Justice,
good faith and decent regard for public Senti-
ment all require this.
Until recently had supposed that there was
no dispute upon this question of principle, but
that every democrat worthy of the name was
willing to concede that il there was one thing
moro than another to which the democratic
party was committed, it was in favor of the
doctrine OF absolute free raw materials The
true and honest construction of every demo-
cratic national platform for twelve years past
irrevocably commits us to this just and reason
able principle
Mr.. Hill read the democratic national
platform of 1892, and continued:
Torepea1 the Mckinley law in form simply; to
re-enact it in effect is keeping this promise to
form pointed with pride and deliberately ap-
proved the measure for free iron ore, free coal
and free wool. which were pending in congress
at the time of the convention. The democratic
position was so plain and is SO clear that he
who runs may read.
If any democratic senator in any part of the
country, forgetting the interests of the whole
land and subscribing the supposed interests Of
a locality. promised the people of any state or
section that there would be any exception
made to the enforcement of the general prin-
ciple of raw materials when the democrats
should obtain power, he exceeded his authority
and misinterpreted our position.
It is said by some in Justification excuse
for their present action, that the presidents
letter of acceptance in 1892 modified the ex-
treme demands of platform. 1t is true
that some portions of his letter may tend to
pear that construction 1t was not that bold
ringing and explicit declaration in favor of the
platform which his party had a right to expect,
hut 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 sentence provision of the
national platform which had been deliberately
adopted by the national convention assembled.
No president can be above his party; no presi-
dent can dictate to his party; no president can
change his party 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 preSi-
dents position at this time upon this essential
principle of free raw materials. Let me read
from that remarkable letter of the presidents
which was yesterday presented to the house OF
Representatives. 1t expresses better than can
hope to do the true, sound and logical position
of the democratic party upon this question.
After reading extracts from this let
ter, Mr.. Hill continued:
Mr.. President, approve of every word that
have quoted. 1t is an honest and manly state
ment of the true attitude which the party
should assume in this crisis. am not required
to defend the propriety wisdom of this pro-
mitigation of this letter at this peculiar time.
1t may have been indiScreet; 1t may operate as
a fire-brand to spread the flames of discord al
ready kindled among party friends. honestly
differing, I disposed to concede, upon
questions of public and party policy. 1t was
time for diplomacy, craftsmanship and concili-
ton, rather than recrimination, denunciation
and arraignment- But aside from the question
of it's mere expediency, am here to defend the
presidents letter in so far that it demands that
the party shall not be led astray into the V1o-
lation of democratic pledges and principles.
Upon the question of free raw materials the
president is right, and you know it. You can
not answer his arguments. You cannot sue
cessfully dispute his propositions. 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 democratic
masses of the country which will rally around
the president in his contest with you upon this
particular branch of the subject. The time to
yield is now, before there is further humilia-
ton, embarrassment and discord.
Mr.. President, having demonstrated that the
true democratic theory OF revenue reform re-
quires that free raw materials should be its
distinguishing feature, let us next inquire
what is the condition which now con-
fronts US. The senate bill which
passed violates this democratic theory, and
while it reduces the duty on iron, coal and some
other raw materials from those imposed under
the Mckinley law, and in that respect is COM
nevertheless imnOSeS Duties
thereon, and thereby fails to redeem our
pledges. It is not a Question of the amount of
duties which may be imposed but a question of
principle involved and single penuy's duty
violates promises and places US in false
position. AS the president well says, there can
be compromise on a question of this char
acter, where a vital principle was at stake.
The house of representatives, fresh from the
people, which represents more distinctly and
peculiarly than do the taxing power of the
people, regulates our bill, and democratic
president has emphasized that reputation,
and the condition which confronts US is one of
to the house while we can do SO honorably, or
shall wait until driven to it?
In the light of the letter of the president
the house cannot hOnorably retreat 1t
has no other alternative except to insist
upon its bill wherein it provides for free raw
materials The president cannot approve the
senate bill after what he has said in this re-
markable letter. He arraignS the senate and
intimates that the enactment of the senate
bill means party perfdy and party dishonor.'
These are strong words. which the president
of the United States would not use toward a
measure which he ever expected afterward to
approve.
This letter, unusual and unprecedented in
its character and method of PRONUNCIATION,
though it may be, nevertheless clearly fore
shadows veto of the senate bill even if the
house should finally concur in our amend
ments. What person would expect the presi-
dent to approve the senate bill after It's vigor-
Gus and scatliing denunciation contained in
his letter You would think less of him for
his glaring inconsistency. No, this letter is
significant, it is bold, vigorous. even If an i'm
prudent letter. 1t means to the knife
against the senate bill: it justifies much that
has been said against the senate bin during all
the last three months; 1t means that it can
never receive the executive approval; it means
that the senate cannot be permitted
to abandon or surrender the great IN
DERIVING principles for which we fought
and won in 1892. The president is right; there
is no middle ground which we can occupy No
bill which does not provide for free raw ma
terials be permitted to become Law. 7.
is unnecessary to enter into any argument to
define or designate what articles constitute
raw materials. Every democrat knows what
II 81 are. Any article may be considered raw
material when ii is in the lowest or crude state
This definition is ample and Sufficient and viii
redeem our pledges if it is honestly applied
The party platform was for free, not freer raw
ais as fS inv 81 rfl1s led