The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1903-04-11
The Sentinel and Democratic Princi-
Piles.

In an article last week the SssiiAei under
took to prove the Democratic party had no
fixed principles, and to its Own satisfaction no
doubt succeeded admirably. lit wall look to
Jefferson's inaugural address in 1871, IL will
find the principles there stated, summarized
from the constitution. The SeHfiHel notes
some departures by the party, commencing
with the 6asco of endorsing Horace Greeley,
for president but It we'll knows that while
number Of leaders urged the endorsement
large section Of the party voted for the indie
pendent candidates and many declined to vote
at ALL Still, the endorsement of Greeley split
the Republican party aud large number OF
Greedy Republicans thereafter affiliated with
the Democratic party, snd in 1876 Tilden
swept the country, but was defrauded of the
election BY Republican rascAlity.
We do not propose to follow the Seafiaei
through its criticisms, aud only intend to note
the following extract
at 1.-The Democratic partyl vigorously es-
poused the doctrine Of free trade 10 1892, but
after winning a victory oH the the issue
adopted tariff law mongrel in character
protective in some directions and free trade
in others"
This is a remarkable acknowledgements
bic for being totally at variance with the fact
in its first part, and more remarkable in the
second part.
We challenge the .Seatiael to produce from
the Democratic platform of 1892 any deelara-
ton in favor of free trade. The policy ofthe
government from its institution to the present
time has been to raise revenue by means Of
tax on imports. II will continue to be the
policy. Any tariff tax is protective, and
tax laid with view to raising revenue only is
also protective tax. The Democratic party
during the nearly sixty years it controlled the
government laid taxation for revenue, aud
fixed rates so as to foster home industries so
far as possible under strictly revenue policy.
Since the Republicans succeeded to power
taxation has been laid with the view Of pro-
lection only. Every change has resulted 10
higher protection, and the protected indus
tries so mercilessly plueked the people that
many DcCAuE Tree AuGhc b1S nSNSA
been enough of them TO influence the declar-
alton Of single state and no effort has been
made in Democratic National Convention to
place free trade plank in platform. To
call declaration for a tariff for revenue free
trade doctrine requires wide stretch Of the
imagination. 1t has been done by the Repub
lican press and orators, but it was done in de-
6ance Of the known truth aad simply to mis-
lead the labor vote.
The Sentinel called the tariff bill Of 1928 8
mongrel measure-proteetve in some diree-
tons and free trade in others. If its charac-
terization of that bill is true every tariff bill
from the foundation of the government to the
present time is q mongrel act. Any tax on
imports operates as protection to any industry
producing the same articles that are taxed,
and every tariff bill has always had its free
list. Consequently ever tariff bill has been
protective in some directions and free trade
in others.
The SeHtiRers statement as 10 the Demo
cratic tariff Of 1898 was rather careless. but its
pen frequently runs wild aud makes all sorts
of statements at variance with facts and
reason.
The difference between the Democratic and
Republican party on tariff taxation is easy to
state. The Democratic party believes in lay
ing taxation to raise revenue to support the
government, economically administered, not
niggardly conducted. To exact more money
from the people than is necessary to defray
the expenses of government is simply robbery
of the people, and sccumulates surplus that
breeds extravaganza and leads to abuses.
The Republican party believes in laying taxa
ton for protec tion-a tax so high that the
cost of foreign goods is so great as to limit
imports of like products of the home factory
and loom, and leave the home market vir-
tually monopolized by home manufactures.
And our manufacturers in turn put up prices
SO as to nearly equal the cost of the imported
goods, with tax added, and exact exorbitant
profits, for it has been clearly demonstrated
that the United States can manufacture goods