The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1901-06-19
ISSUES IN next ELECTION.
Interview of Representative Rich
ardson, Leader of Democrats
in the House.


of the Democrats in House OF Repre-
sgntatives, and Chairman of the Demo
cratic Congressional committee in the
last election, has given out an inter
esting interview in regard to the IS
sues that will be at stake in the cleo
tion of 1904 and, to a lesser degree, IN
that of 1902. Of these he put the
tariff first, calling attention to discord
in Republican ranks on this question,
resulting from the Babcock Tariff Dill
and the violent attacks made on It's
author by the American Protective As
sociation. He says: 'sThe tariff ques-
ton which the Republican party declar-
ed a few years ago to have been settled
finally and forever in favor Of high pro-
lection, will be found to be very press
inc in the next Presidential cam
oaign. Trusts, the offspring Of the
Republican policy, have ssgrown SO
great that they overtop the parent ana
Dame Protection can no loner conceal
them at her back by spreading her
skirts or enveloping them in the black
smoke of the fayorites. Even the
trusts themselves demand something
more than simple home products TO
feed on, and the most robust OF them
are looking for an open way to foreign
markets. Within the very ranks OF
the Republican party there is discon-
tent at the continuance Of the system
which shuts us out of our proper place
in the worlds commerce. There is
reluctant acknowledgment that the old
Democratic tariff doctrines furnish
means to open markets for our pro-
ducts. 1t may be clearly seen by one
who looks ahead that the tariff ques-
tion will enter into the campaign OF
1904 as an important issue and that
the Democrats will be found standing
where they have always stood. y
Next Mr.. Richardson calls attention
TO the danger to the Monroe doctrine
through our expansion policy, ex-
planning why the Administration
should have been so pusilanimous IN
regard TO Germany's suspected design
to buy an island from Venezuela, for
a coaling station. It will be remem-
bo,od that when this was mooted the
Secretary of State declared that the
Monroe doctrine probably did not
cover such cases. Mr.. Richardson
SAYS: 1.-THE jeopardy in which the
Monroe doctrine has been placed
through the shortsighted policy Of the
Mckinley Administration is likely
to attract very wide public attention
and may even become an overshadowlng
issue. I do not know whether 1t IS
fully realized by our people that the
agitation over the Monroe doctrine
at this time is due to the fact that
the Administration is seriously en-
barrassed by the anticipated purpose
of foreign governments to acquire
coaisng stations in the proximity OF
South and Central American ports.
<'Prior to our adventure in the
PHILIPPINES and before we had become
world power, to use the term as
the advocates of Engire use it, the
desire OF foreign governments to estab-
ish bases of supplies within the
sphere Of American republics would
have oceasioned no serious e1nbarrass-
ment. There were no doubts excited
by foreign entanglements and compli-
caa ons of conflicting policy. There
was no question of our right to object
and it was silently acknowledged by
ali sae world. But the new policy of
the Administration has placed this
government in such position that to
maintain sovereignty over remote isl
ands the United States must acquire
the right to establish coaling stations
within the sphere where the influence
of foreign powers is recognized. How
gan this government deny to other
pomers privilege within the sphere
covepI by the Monroe doctrine while
1T seeks similar privilege within
their dominion? This is the question
whic2s eznbarrasses.
"Taa Administration does not know
Ianr u refsse privileges similar to
those it must ask; yet to grant them
would be at least modification OF the
Monroe doctrine and would threaten
our stability as a nation, through per.
hitting the establishment OF bases OF
suool;es at our very ports, from wnlcn
foreign powers could operate against
rs in time of war. Worse tnan an
abandonment of the Monroe doctrine,
this would place Us in the position ol u
not being strong enough to defend II
ar TO defend ourselves with certainty