Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-06-01
Mr.. Daniel and fha Tariff

Hon. John w. Daniel is called 20 ac-
count by the New York Sun for having
been guilty Of the following utterance.
Mr.. Daniel said:
There are many things in II Uhe tariff
Did j do not like, but our party has de-
termined TO follow the committee by It's
common action and have never sepa-
rated from my party when its caucus
or convention determined its course. and
i shall not now. The amendments pro-
posed have been approved by the Secre-
tary or the Treasury. they were devised
10 harmonic differences Of opinion and
To satisfy the party, and IL Is the part
OF patriotism 10 stand by the measure"
The Sun denounces Mr.. Daniels remark
as showing "the poverty OF the Virginia
Senator's defence Of the indefensible."
and argues that the promise OF the Demo-
Gratis to the people remains in full force,
and still calls for "a tariff for revenue
only" This same Sun, be II remembered,
has recently said wittily and sarcastically
that Mr. Cleveland was once elected Pres
ident ON a protection platform and after
his election as President came out as
free-trader, and next was elected Presi-
dent as free-trader and afterwards
came out as a protectionist.
The Sun thus suggests an unanswera-
bic reply 10 It's own contention. How
long is party bound by its declarations
made in its national convention? IL
creed thus formulated Is the permanent
law Of the party, then how did the Chi
cago convention Of 1899 become possessed
of the right to set aside the Protectionist
platform upon which the Sun says Mr..
Cleveland was elected in 1884?
Again: The Committee on the Platform.
reported TO the last Chicago convention
a resolution which might be called Pro
tectionist resolution. A majority Of that
committee. speaking, as they supposed, for
the whole Democratic party, recommend
ed Randall utterahce on the tariff
question. This Randall utterance. we
have argued, and so Mr.. Halstead argues,
had been submitted TO Mr.. Cleveland
and by him accepted. Such certainly
seems TO have been the case. Why may
not Mr.. Cleveland now stand by that
resolution? Is he to wait for the national
convention Of 1896 TO assemble and speak
before he can cut loose from Mr.. Neal?
And how can the Presidents supporters
ever get their platform Of 1892 tncorpo-
rated into the Democratic party's creed
unless they are allowed to discuss the
question? Hasn't Mr.. Daniel the right TO
try to get his tariff Views adopted by
the next national convention? II the free
traders gained a victory in 1892, as the
Sun contends. they gained a victory over
men who have the right to try to induce
the next national convention to plant it
self upon the Randall platform.
The fact, as herenbefore mentioned,
that a majority of the Platform Commit
tee Of the Democratic National Conven-
ton of 1892, composed Of leading states
men from all parts of the Union, reported
"a protection or Randall resolution on the
tariff question ought to close the mouth
Of our New York contemporary. Neither
Mr.. Daniel nor any other good Democrat
need be afraid to follow the lead OF the
distinguished Democrats who thus ranged
themselves in 1892 upon the platform of
one cor more previous national conven-
tons.