The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-07-21

anY d1sElocT1fIc sSaast6rsf from any part hf
tae ee2ntFy. iorgettsae the interests OF
the w2oie land aad suhSerylng the sup
| posed interests of his beatty, promised
4 she people of any state OF section thAs
there won,a 70 an exceptlan rnAdexo the
! endorsements OF the general princsg,le oF
/ raS sealegia1 When TIE Democrats should
/ ofS11 nower. ne < X ,eraed his authority
/ ard r-Iassep presented our poslfi0n
IA IS said oy some. in iaSti6catfoo or
exsSess Ter their present action. shat the
n-ss%5ent's Letter Of acceptance IN ISa3
4 moidlea the extreme demands of nHr piat-
t0Ffa IL - true that some portions Of
/ his letter NAV tend - bear that construc-
nan. Il WAS nos that bold. riu.irg and
1 eypslelt declaration IN favor OF fhe plat
+ form which has party had q ri9ht 10 ex-
/ pect, bat Sss regarded by many as
tdnsd. cautious aud conservative: bat
| whether THIS criticism Is or is not
/ weA founded the tact remains that he had
/ not power or authority to change or alter
one line or sentence or provision OF that
platieaga winch had been deliberately
adopted by the national convention duly
I assembled. Ne president can be above
1 his partys no president can dictate 20 his
I party; no president c2q change his party
/ platform. But no matter what idea il may
he claimed gas intended 20 be conveyed
/ ia his letter of acceptance in mitigation or
modification OF the platform, there can 10
no doubt ~ to the presidents position at
3
raw materials Let me read from that
remarkable letter OF the presidents which
was Yesterday submitted To khe house of
/ representatives. Rexpresses better than
can hope to do the true, sound and logical
/ position of the Democratic party upon this
| question"
| After reading extracts from this letter,
Hill continued:
"Mr. President. I approve every word
that | have quoted. 1t is an honest and
! manly statement of the true astit ude which
1 the party should assume in this crisis.
am not required TO defend the propriesy
or wisdom 9of the PRONUNCIATION OF the
/ letter at this particular time. liz may
have been indiscreet.1 Ii may operate as q
| hrebrand to1Epread the flames of discori
| already kindled among party friends hon.
estly dffieriaR. as am disposed 10 con-
| cede, upoR questions of public andcparty
/ policy. twas time for dIpLomacys states
/ manshfp and conciliation rather than re-
elimination, denuncianonG and arraign-
ment. But, ASIDE from the question of its
/ expediency. am here to defend the presi-
/ dents letter in 50 far as II demands that
/ the party shall notobe Led5aseray into vio-
lation of fDemecFafic pledges and principles
Upon the question oftree9 raw matters
ais tie president isright, and you know IL.
/ You cannot answer his arguments. You
/ cannot successfully dspn1eo his PROPOSE
4 tions. You cannot doubt his sincerity aud
A
his views YOU caume< sIazfd up against
/ the sentiment of NfeS great Democratic
I masses 0fthe copntry. which rally around
/ the prssldentin Ills contest with you upon
| this particular br aRchaof the subject. The
time to1yield Is now. before there Is fur
/ ther humiliation, embarrassment and dis
4 cord.
s'ME President, haying demonstrated
that the true Democratic theory OF rove-
nue. reform requires that free raw materi-
asshould be its distinguishing feature, let
us pext inquire what is the condition
which now c0nfronts uN. The senate
I bill which was passed violates this
/ Democratic theory, and while it re-
duces che duties on iron. coal, lead
and some other raw materials from those
imposed under the Mckinley Law. aud in
1 that respect IS commsndablc, IL nevarthe-
less IMPOSES some duties thereupon, and
| thereby fails to redeem our pledges. 10 is
| not question of the amount of duties
/ which may be Imposed. A question Of
prin@pie IS concerned, and single
I pennyss duEy violates Sour promises and
/ places Us in a false position. The presi-
| de1kweil says there can be no compromise
1 on a matter of this chAraeter. where a vital
/ princif4e Is ut stakeC 90
"The house of representatives. fresh
from tho people which repTesentso more
distinctly and peculiarly than We do the
4 taxing poweK of the people, repudiates our
! bill, and . Democrats president has EN-
ptiasized that fepudiation, and the condi-
/ lion which confrontsus Is one of extreme
embarrassment. Shall We surrender 20
| the house " hile we cpn do so honorably,
or shall we wait until we driven TO itf
| In the light of the letter OF the president.
/ the house cannot eh@norably retreat. Ii
| has no other Alternative except TO insist
upon its bill, Wherein it provides for free
/ raw mAtepals. oB e.
'The president cannot approve the SEN
| ate bill after what he has said inDthis re-
| markable letter. He arralgns the senate
| aud intimates Nhat the enactment OF the
senate bilI means patty perhdy and party
! dishouor These arc stroAg words which
the president Of the United States could
| not use toward measure which he ever
| expected afterw ards 20 approves. This
| letter. unusual and unprecedented in its
character and methods of PRONUNCIATION
though IL may be, nevertheless clearly
| foreshadDws the veto OF the senate bill,
even Il the house should finally concur
in our amendments. What person
| would expect tho president 10 ap-
prove the senate bill after its
| vigorous aud scathinR denunciation
con tniiped in bis letterT You would think )
less Of lim FOR las garing inconsistency s
| No; this letter is significant IL is a bold and
! vigorous even u imprldept letter. lt
means war to the knife against the senate
4 biii II lustiSes much that has been said
| against the seasaEe bill during ali the last
| receive the executives apprevaL It means
! that the senate cannot b8 permitted to-
| abandon or Surrender the great under
| lying principles for which We fought and
lost IN 1883. and fosght aad won in tS92a
| The president Is rights there Is no middle
ground which we canroccapy.
"No bill which does not provide for free
1 ray materials can 0e perBitted 20 become
| afMw. Ii is unsecessary 20 enter into an
| argument % define or designate what arti-
cles constitute raw materials. Every Dem
| ocrat knows what they are. Any article
| may be considered Ta@ material when a.
! il IN the lowest or crude state. This definl-
ton ls ample aud sufficient. and will re-
deem our pledgm If H1 is2honestiy applied.
The party platform was for free, not
freer. raE materialsy As IS now ingeniously
contended, Ii the president ia bis Wis
| dom has seen ht4 while tile debate was
progressing in the senate. 10 haze aided
my Efforts 10 secure adhesion 20 these
principles by expressing his views IN favor
/ lhereof in some proper and legitimate
way, ,9xe should have been gratsiled, and
a unqueztionabsy w0Ad have heen Of
PRACTICAL benefit % the cause. IreJGice
that lie has expressed them even nov. al
thoagf ara not required 70 defend the
manner Of Iheig presentation even II they
so required. 9hich | do not assume.
III rrspecffuily difiEF from the president
Ia his assumption thHtra tax upon sugar is
necessary at thks time, conced@ag inst 8n
income taK X q belrEtalnad Clearly both
ars nt.S needesl tor any legitimate purpose
/ Of the treasury. The president sfeaks 81
Democratic priuei pies and po'iey. which
I Led 10 the taNatsQn % sugar, and be