The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1897-05-12
Stokes TO BRADdAM.
~ OPGH LETTER ON TIE COTTON
TASiFF QUESTION,
5,ne-- ssnan Stokes rak~s Cap. Eradhao

TAsiEF QyEs1 ION,
oone--ssns an stckes rats~s Cap Eradnao,
rn Task for Publishing " Private Letter
aoa EestIirn,s Eiis Position or tho Cotton
TariT
TIE Nsws azd Coasier pu1Iished
ae f2iIo&iuE opsn lister las. Satur
lGy norain4:
Cal J. >. Bsss7s,;s2, sfaz:;ae. S
DeSr Sir: TrTcus1 the though.
u'aeSS II 4 fr.easi I a.: II receipt oi
s nlarkeG copy oi tAo Ms sad Ccu
sier Ia hicn goa publish ny privats
l=ttcr to yo2, sad your reply. Thou n
ana le liue elapsed you Gav= me 20
iu,iualiuG III Your pnr3osa d DOT
oSjsct 10 !he publication, to"Aver-
II fact / an rather glad bow that il is
ou5!isasd, >iace YOU insist Uroa pub
l.c discussion at this time. But. MAJ k
sh:s-ny willingness IL tba premises,
cot having heea aSc-r5aiGed ty you
beio; eaand. will not take away irom
the transaction tie suggestion OF bad
fsi.n; nor lit The favoc OF sharp arac-
tee,
The close personal and Alliance r3-
laticGs heretofore suos!Stjng between
US might have warranted q mere ci-
rect appeal 10 goU 70 stand True 10 the
doctrines we had together s5cod for
in the past; tus I merely asked your
careful attention TO published argu
meni, and emphasized some additional
points. Read IN connection with thai
argument much oi your IL h1mored
criticism falls utterly pointle:s.
/ stand 81 every Statement of fact
IL Uy Letter, as touching matters that
came under my personal observation
or from contact wita Republican
members; and tins will provo the cor,
rectness OF my predictions.
Bat Let ell tnat pass. S;Gce yoa IL
sist upon discussion Of tariff now let
US discuss it without heat, dispassioI-
aIaly. You are q jarmer; SO am I.
We are both producers of short staple
cotton; So are youT people snd mine.
Whatever The bearing Of tho question
may bel. bears upon ourinterests alike.
II we are to obtain the relief me desire
for cur industry we UIust keep to-
gether. We can't afford to divide,
out il we continue to travel together
we rcust be patient and tolersnt.
Hence | pass ever much IN your letter
tnst seems Ill considered aud unjust,
not 10 say ii tempered, and will con
fine myself to tie question at issue.
Since you seem to resent considera-
ton from tie standpoint Of the Demo
cratic platform, and challenge me as
an Alliancemao to defend my posi-
tior. I Ill sndsavor 10 treat the ques
ZION specially with reference to the
Alliance de:usnds. You seem to for
get, however, Ihat oG the taciff, AID
many ether issues, the Alliance de-
MANS and the Democratic Platform
State aua nsticnaD are identical.
You seem to losa sight Of The fact thsi
we framed the Alliance demands b.
cause we thought they were right;
and :or the same reason We placed
those demands in the State Democrat
ic platform. So tnst, IL appealing to
the platforms, l was simply appealing
to tna5 when you and and others had
sccepted IS right and beneficial from
the farmers standpoint.
IL the hrst piace, then, ycu say that
anG ether AJiiarc9 leaders iEdustri-
cusly taught you thst ''the money
quas,ion, no. the tariff, was !oe issue. "
Tnat is true; but who is agitating the
tariff issue AID Insisting Epon lis dis
c, ssion nov? I have pleaded with
you ard with others not TO asitate il
low. In ny published article, which
you say you resd, I distinctly protest,
ed 4ga;ns. &g3:ating il, taus Gi7erLing
attention from tie money question at
a tine when we should b. closing up
our ranks for tbs grand assault upon
gold monopoly in 1898 ard Il 1900.
l Plead with you no. 10 agitate ths
tariff question ROW, and you seem un-
accouulably irritated AID consumed
with Indignation OF account of it. |
am singing the same old tune" no"
that l suGg when I vas, as you say,
<indastriousiy teaching that the moo
ey question, not tie tariff, is the is
sue" You say you took US Al cur
word then-why not nowl
In modest way | did teach that
along with others, anG I am still PRO
testing agains: any diversion or atten
ton from the money question, espac
cially since you admit that the pre-
posed tariff on cotton could not benefit
producers Of short staple cotton
Taat the proposed tex cannot be adopt
ed at tnis tims IS coGclusd ali round.
The present tariff bill will probably
re,aain in force at least four years
Then why asitate ii? But what did
the Al!isnce and It's leaders really
teach OF the tariff issue? Tie Ocala
demand On the tariff, which you and
I and Others helped place in our State
Democratic platform, reads thus:
Believing IN the doctrine OF equal
rights to all and special privileges tc
none, we demand that our national
legisI alton shall be 50 framed in fu-
ture as rot to build up one industry
at the expense OF another. We fur
ther demand a removal Of the exist
ing heavy tariff tax from the necessi
ties Of life that the poor CT cur land
must have"
You quoted the preamble to that de
mand in your ]ettsr-why did you rot
quote il all. Ycu challenged me TO
the Alliance view, and then you quot
ed only e part. Why quote a half
truth, When the whole truth lay right
alongside! DID you believe that de-
msR6 was right. Captain. when you
helped to place it ia the Stste Demo
cratic platform, CT when you endorses
il as an Alliance mac2 II you were
sincere then, and have not changed
since, what right have you. as q cen
sistent Alliance man, not 10 sag Dem-
j