Daily Arizona silver belt., 1909-06-02
PARTY ALIGNMENT ON TARIFF

PARTY ALIGNMENT ON TARIFF
 Every one who has followed the tariff
 debate in the senate, revealing the strong hold the protective idea has gained among democratic leaders, at the same time disclosing considerable revolt among middle western senators against the worst abuses of the protec- tive system, must have wondered wheth- CT out of the apparent confusion of party lines there may not arise new alignment of'poitical forces and of pc ltical issues. Is it possible for the high protectionist republican and the west ern ''irsurgent" to remain in the same political camp, and can the protection ist democrat and his tariff for revenue only brother continue to fight under the same banner? Will the cohesive power of organization which has hitherto kept theso inharmonious elements together prove effectual to do so in the futrue?
 It is evident, We think, that the party lCdQClo uO A-OV eihbANARAOS any breakup in ths old political organiza- ticns or any nominal change in their declarations of principle. Particularly is this true of the republicans. They are united, as we have said on a former occasion on the basic principle of pro tection. Not one of the western ''in- surgents'' but has ardently protested his affection for the protective policy. They resent, as Senator Bever.dge did the other day, any insinuation that thy are not true protectionists. What they are contending for is not an abandon ment of the protective policy, but its less rigorous application. Mere reduc tions of duties would satisfy them as redemption of their campaign prom ises. If every one of their demands were granted, the protective policy would stand intact, though slightly mod erated. Obviously there is nothing in the differences here noted incapable of composition, for they relate not to prin- ciple but to the details of its action.
 In the democratic ranks the differ ences are over the principle itself. Yet 1t is probable that the great body of democrats is, or soon will be, moderate ly protectionist. This being the situa- ton, an astute party leader like Sen
 ator Bailey realizes that a semblance of unity and opposition can be pre- served only by keeping up & fight against inordinate protective duties and excusing reasonably protective duties as imposed for revenue simply. In fact, the whole tariff issue, as between the democrats and republicans, as well as between the "insurgents" and their high tariff brethren, Is rapidly dwind- ling to one of percentages merely. The degree of protection, the selection of beneficiaries, tho mode of imposing duties-these are the topics of consider ation and the subjects of division. Where Senator Bailey would impose duty of 20 per cant, an insurgent re- publican would be content with 30, but MT. Aldrich demands 40. And so the disputation goes on without any guid- ing principle but that of mere bargain and trade in the application of protec- ton, to quote MT. Bailey's description of the process of revision. Of course, the democrats lose much of their power of opposition when they concede the enemy's principle. But even if they merely oppose his application of it, they pursue fairly consistent course, and their opposition is just as effective as it has been at any time these twenty years-that is, it amounts to practically nothing; for the democratic party has not been able, either in theory or ill practice, to cleanse itself wholly of the protective idea.
 We are unable, therefore, to discern the rise of any opposition party, by any sort of combination that will stand souarely for the abolition of protective duties. The most that can bs expected from an opposition party. under exist ing conditions, is that it shall condemn immoderate protection and demand cor rection of the abuses of the protective system. Such a party, on such plat form, is the only one that can con ceivably unite the low tariff sentiment of the country. As the democratic party answers best to this description, it can easily maintain some sort of coherent opposition to it's ancient antagonist, even though the differences between them on the tariff appear less than ever.