The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1897-07-19
Some Small Matters of History.

In Inc New ICrk sun We ma inc Ioi-
lowing paragraph which demands
moments attention.:
The democratic party, which was elected
In 1882, advocated protection from tho mo-
ment 1t assembled in congress, and 1t
passed protective tariff bill. The reNe-
nue. only" principle was formally stricken
out of the democratic platform IN Chicago
in 1886. let The Atlanta Constitution hst-
waited for a republican protective measure
before raising II protest. If our contem-
porary were not a Bryanite We should
feel sure that it was a gold medal cuckoo
The Sun, following its gold ssandaid
theory to a legitimate conclusion, has
become republican organ, but that is
no reason why its editor should com
NIT himself - such transformation as
is contained in the foregoing.
In 1892, even aefore Cleveland was
nominated, The Constitution warned the
party that he would betray l.; that he
was committed to interests which were
and are utterly opposed to every demo-
cratic principle and idea.
Later, when the Wilson protective
tariff bill emanated from the ways and
means committee. where it had been
fashioned by Cleveland and Carlisle,
The Constitution pointed out that tar
if measure which produced a deficit in
stead of yielding revenue was protec-
tive to the very core and sot in accord
ance with the party's platform.
More than that, The Constitution
pointed out that the free list attached to
the Wilson bill was utterly Inconsistent
with a tariff for revenue. In the Will
son bill, the manufacturers not only re-
ceived the benefit of protective duties,
but had, in addition, the sop of free coal,
free iron ore and free lumber thrown to
them. We showed that, at the very
least. the Wilson free list was a dis
elimination against the producers OF raw
material and in favor of the manufact-
urers, and that such discrimination was
wholly obnoxious to democratic princi-
pies. If this was not protesting against
the Wilson bill, what was it?
At the same time, we placed the re-
sponsibility for the measure where it
belongod-on Cleveland, who used his
personal influence and the powers of his
office to prevent and repudiate the tariff
pledges of the party platform. The dem
Ocrats in the house were overawed by
Cleveland. Some of them really be-
lieved that he was conscientious in his
political views. while others were sub
servient in the hope of currying official
favor.
The situation was very embarrassing
To repudiate Cleveland at thar stage Of
the game would have been TO divide the
party. Consequently many of the de-
Tenders Of the democratic faith in con-
gress thought it well TO remain compar-
atively passive and allow time to do its
Il Il
that policy. The party has rid itself Of
Cleveland ard Cleyelandism with practi-
cal unanmity, and is now more har-
since the war.
That Mr.. Cleveland was responsible
for the Reputation of the democratic
tariff pledges. and that he indorsed the
most Ubiquitous feature of the Wilson,
German bill. was clearly demonstrated
by his private letter 70 Mr.. Wilson when
the senate amendments We're before the
house. and by the fact that he permit
ted the measure to become law.
Tho whole wretched business was
brought to light and exposed in the SEN
ate the other day when Senator Vest
in response to some pointed inquiries
from Senator Bacon in regard to his
vote LOT ~ per cent UulleS III the " IL
son bill, rose in his place in the senate,
and publicly washed his hands Of that
affair. declaring that his vote was east
against his convictions as the result OF
solicitation and pressure brought to bear
by Mr.. Cleveland and his secretary Of
the treasury. Mr. Carlisle.
Senator Vest is one of the most faith
full and vigorous Of the democratic lead
ers. and his statement shows clearly
why the democrats, instead of framing
n revenue tariff bill, adopted a measure
that is only a little less protective than
the republican affair now pending in
the conference committee.
The Constitution is now, IS it was
then, in favor Of a tariff for revenue
only-that IS to say a tariff which viii
afford a sufficient supply Of revenue to
support the government honestly and
economically administered 1t is OPP
posed to jobs in or ont of tariff bills.
1t is opposed to DETERMINATIONS against
private interests and Individuals whether
in free lists or in protective duties. And
it is equally opposed to the hair-split-
ting and confusing interpretations Of
those who pretend to find a mighty diff
ference between a tariff for revenue
"only" and tariff for revenue. There is
no difference.