The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-08-16
AND STILL WE ASK "wHEkE ARE
WE AT?"

The Democratic President. Mr.. Cieve-
land. has announced most emphatically
that free raw materials" is a funda-
mental Democratic doctrine. and we
hear distinguished Democrats making the
same announcement every day. Yester-
days dispatches added Senator Ransom
TO those who announce the doctrine.
and we shall hear of others no doubt
from time TO time.
Now this is a question OF principle. and
IL is of the last importance that IL
should be deliberately considered and
that the party doctrine upon the subject
should be authorltatively stated. For our
selves we are absolutely unable to con-
cede that II is or can be made Democratic
doctrine. We have always been taught
to believe. and We have always under
stood. that the Democratic party ex-
listed to secure TO all men a footing Of
perfect equality before the laws. and TO
30 construct the laws that they shall
favor none and bear hardly upon none
We have always understood that that
was the essence of Democracy. and that
no measure could be a Democratic mea-
sure If. in any degree whatever, 1t vioat-
ed that principle.
Now If we tax one import owned by
one man and allow another import owned
by another man TO come into our ports
untaxed, we have certainly imposed a
burden upon one man from which we
have exempted another man. and we
have not. therefore. enacted laws that
bear equally upon all, but we have
enacted law which favors one 10 the
detriment OF another. This. to our mind.
Is an absolute abrogation and denial of
that principle which we understand TO
be the very essence OF Democracy, and
we are utterly unable to understand
how any Democrat can ask for any
such legislation.
Senator David b. Hill. he who Is per-
petuaily mounting IL am a Democrat"
said yesterday In giving his views Of the
tariff bill:
u was strenuously opposed 10 the Cor
man compromise Senate bill and voted
against IL. i preferred a Democratic rev
enue tariff bill without any Populistic
income tax. but with free raw materials
free coal. free iron, free lead: with free
necessaries Of life. including free SUGAR.
and reasonable. but not extreme tariff
duties. My votes were given and my
efforts exerted in the direction Of procur-
Ing such measure. and l naturally re-
greet that such one was not passed
which would be defensble. The country
Will not accept the present bill without
great reluctance and disappointment"
Mr. Hill repeatedly spoke against the
income tax. his argument being that it
was not and could not be a Democratic
measure. because it did not bear equally
upon all men. IL taxed the man who had
an income of 5000 and exempted the
man whose income was $3.50 But how
could he vote against the income tax
bill upon this ground and vote for the
provision that exempted the importer Of
coal and iron ore from taxation? What
IL the difference in principle between the
TWO? There IL none. of course, and IL
MIR. Hin thinks his votes are not under
stood ne makes the blunder of his life.
New York has many wealthy Democrats
upon whom the income tax will bear
hardly, and Mr.. Hill. therefore votes
against II. invoking. properly and with
great force, fundamental Democratic
doctrine to justify the vote. But New
York also has immense manufacturing
interests that viii receive immense and
unfair advantages from free coal and
iron' and Mr.. hin votes for free coal
and iron mot because II Is Democratic
doctrine. because It is not. and his ar.,l-
ments against the income tax utterly con
oemn ~. because they will bring those
unfair advantages 70 New York mann.
facturers.
senator Aldrlch. Republican, in ex-
pressing his Views OF the tariff bill said.
The bill Will now 30 TO the country win
the emphatic pronunciation OF n majority
OF the Democratic press. which has with
unanimity concurred in the exprcss,,n
OF the President that the measure was
perhdious and dishonorable." The Demo
cratic press has pronounced the bin perf,d-
sonA ana @Ahonorable. but not upon the