Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1909-06-18

to succeed in which the republican
rarity must have that same support
from the benefciaries of the high pro-
teetiye tariff as it has always hereto
fore received from them; and to the
further fact that during years of IN
interrupted power no action whatever
has been taken by the republican con-
gress to correct the admittedly ex-
isting tariff iniquities.
"We favor immediate revision Of
the tariff by the reduction of import
duties. Articles entering into COM
petition with trust controlled pro-
ducts should be placed upon the free
list; material reductions should be
made in the tariff upon the necessar-
les of life, especially upon articles
competing with such American manu-
features as are sold abroad more
cheaply than at home, and gradual re-
auctions should be made in such other
schedules as may be necessary to re-
store the tariff to a revenue basis.
"Existing duties have given the
manufacturers of paper a shelter be-
hind which they have organized COM
binations to raise the price of pulp
and of paper, thus imposing a tax up
on the spread of knowledge. We de-
mand the immediate repeal of the
tariff on wood pulp, print paper, lum-
Der, timber and logs, and that these
articles be placed upon the free list. y
1t will be noticed that the last SEN
tence of the last paragraph Of the
plank contains definite and specific
demand for "the immediate repeal
of the tariff on wood pulp, print paper
lumber, timber and logs, and that
these articles be placed upon the free
LIST"
No language could be more clear;
no platform promise could be more
explicit. If the democratic party is
committed to anything, it is commit
ted to the REPEAL of the tariff on wood
pulp, print paper, lumber, timber and
logs.
In the tariff contest in congress a
number of democrats in the senate
and house have voted for a tariff on
lumber, 'and have attempted to defend
their action in so doing. Two ques-
tions are involved, and the democratic
party must be prepared to meet these
questions and answer them to the
satisfaction of the country.
First, is a platform promise bind
ing? We are now charging that the
republican party is guilty of breach
Of promise in not revising the tariff
downward. But how can the demo
Gratis criticise the republicans for con.
STRUNG the word "revise" to mean
an increase in the tariff if democratic
senators and congressman deliberate.
ly repudiate plain an unmistakable
promise of free lumber? The demo.
Gratis who voted against free lumber
will, of course, be called upon to de.
fend themselves, and to do so they
must deny that national platforms arr
binding, or they must insist that the
national platform was not bindine
upon them. If they say that plat.
forms are not binding, they attack {
well settled democratic doctrine
namely, that the voters can instruct
their representatives. A platform
that is not binding is worse than n.
platform at all, because it mislead.
the voters. 1t is better for a party
to make no promises than to make {
promise and then break it.
If those democrats who have op
posed free lumber opposed it on thu
ground that, while platforms are gen
orally binding, this platform was no
binding upon them, it is incumben
upon them to show either that the,
were elected before this platform wa
adopted, or that in their campaign
they openly repudiated the platform
and gave notice Of their adherence t,
a different doctrine. Even the sena
TORS elected before the platform wa
adopted might feel justified in givinI
some consideration to platform en-
doIsed by so large vote at the polls
The democrat who sets his judgmen
up against the declarations of hi
party assumes the burden of proc
to establish the righteousness of hi
own position and the error in the pc
sition taken by his party.
Aside from having to meet tn,