The daily palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1904-1905, 1904-09-12
OF
ACCEPTANCE
Continued from Second Page.)

port as prima facie proof that the
person therein described is a citizen
OF the United States and entitled to
protection as such. It is a standing
order to every American diplomatic
and consular officer to protect every
American citizen, of whatever faith,
from unjust molestation; and our Off
GERS abroad have been stringently re-
quired to comply with this order.
Under such circumstances, the de-
mand of our opponents that negotia-
tlons be begun to secure equal treat
ment of all Americans from those
governments which do not now ac-
cord it, shows either ignorance Of the
facts Or insincerity. No change of
policy in the method or manner of ne
gotiation would add effectiveness to
what the State Department has done
and is doing.
Our opponents have now declared
themselves in favor of the Civil Ser
vice law, the repeal of which they de-
manded in 1900 and in 1896. If con-
sistent, they should have gone one
step further and congratulated the
country upon the way in which the
Civil Service law is now administered,
and the way in which the classified
service has been extended.
Finally, We come to certain matters
upon which our opponents do in their
platform of principles definitely take
issue with us, and where, if they are
sincere, their triumph would mean
disaster to the country. But exactly
as it is impossible to call attention to
the present promises and past rec
ords of our opponents without SEEM
ing offensive, so it is impossible to
compare their platform with their
other and later official utterances and
not create doubt as to their sincerity.
ances many of them frankly advance
this insincerity as merit, taking the
position that as regards the points
on which I am about to speak they
have no intention of keeping their
promises Or of departing from the
policies now established, and THAT
therefore they can be trusted not to
abuse the, power they seek.
When We take up the great question
of the tariff we are at once confronted
by the doubt as to whether our oppo-
nents do Or do not mean what they
say. They say that ''protection is
robbery and promise to carry them
selves accordingly if they are given
power. Yet prominent persons among
them assert they do not really mean
this and that if they come into power
they will adopt our policy as regards
the tariff; while others seem anx-
ious to prove that it is safe to give
them partial power, because the pow
err would be only partial, and there
fore they would not be able to do mis-
chief. The last is certainly curious
plea to advance ON behalf of a party
seeking to obtain control Of the gov
eminent.
At the outset it is worth while to
say word as to the attempt to iden-
tify the question of tariff revision or
tariff reduction with a solution of the
trust question. This is always a sign
of desire to avoid any real effort to
deal adequately with the trust ques-
ton. In speaking on this point at Min
neapolis, on April 4, 1908, said:
"The question of tariff revision,
speaking broadly, stands wholly apart
from the question of dealing with the
trusts. No change in tariff duties can
have any substantial effect in solving
the socalled trust problem. Certain
great trusts or great corporations are
wholly unaffected by the tariff. AL
most all the others that are of any
Importance have as a matter of fact
numbers of smaller American compe.
titors; and of course a change in the
tariff which would work injury to the
large corporation would work not
merely injury but destruction to its
smaller competitors; and equally OF
course such change would mean dis
aster to all the wage-workers con.
nected with either the large Or the
small corporations. From the stand
point of those interested in the solu
ton of the trust problem such 6
change would therefore merely NEAR