St. Landry clarion. (Opelousas, La.) 1890-1921, 1910-01-01
Prospects, of Democratic Congress !,
By William Jennings Bryan,
IN NATIONAL MONTHLY.
N NATIONAL MONTHLY

i @&&%N @#E@T I8r= FE@8&& AHA#
We ought to elect a Democratic
Congress this year-there would be
no doubt about it but for the unfor-
tunate division that manifested itself
in our party during the discussion of
the Aldrich bill. The attempt Of
some Of the Democratic members and
Senators to secure protection for
local interests put them in the atti-
tude of opposing reductions proposed
by the progressive Republicans.
While the rates asked by these pro-
tectionist Democrats were low as
compared with the high rates Of
manufactured products, still the very
fact that they demanded protection,
and not only demanded protection,
but more protection, in some instances,
than the progressive Republicans were
ready to give to those particular ar
ticles, puts our party on the defen-
sive when it urges tariff reduction.
In addition to the supporting protee-
tive duties, a few Of the Democratic
representatives in the Senate and the
House attacked the national platform
and denied the binding force Of plat
forms. The position was 50 broadly
stated in some cases as to make the
platform worse than useless if such
position is endorsed by the Demo-
Gratis Of the nation.
A platform that is not binding is a
fraud, because it invites support on a
pledge that is only made to be broken.
am sure that the almost unanimous
sentiment among Democrats is that a
platform is binding upon the Repre-
sentative, and that to violate it
in letter or in spirit is not only UNI
democratic, but subversive to the
principles Of representative govern
ment. Ii is sometimes urged that a
platform ought not to go into detail,
but that depends upon conditions.
The convention which adopts a plat
form has authority to decide whether
it will deal with general principles or
presentsspeeifc demands. The official
cannot, after his election. reject the
platform upon which he secured his
position.
Most of the Democratic votes cast
against proposed reduction we're de-
Tended by those who cast them on
the ground that raw materials should
be taxed SO long as there is a tax on
the manufactured product, and,
strange to say, the Democrats, who
presented this defense, insisted that
they were only asking for a revenue
tariff. A tariff that is asked for the
purpose Of protecting a producer Of
raw material cannot be called a reye-
nue. tariff, no matter how small it is.
A revenue tariff IS a tariff collected
for the purpose of raising revenue
and without regard to the question of
protection. There may be incidental
protection under revenue tariff, but
a tariff is not incidental when it is
planned for and demanded on the
ground Of Justice to the producer Of
raw material, Z or on the ground that
il is not fair to-subjeet the pro-
ducer Of raw material to foreign
competition as long as there is a tariff
on manufactured products.
Those who voted against redue-
tions vigorously denounced protection
to manufacturers, overlooking entire
y the fact that a large part Of the
protection secured BY manufacturers
is under the guise Of compensatory
duties. Whenever a tax is placed
upon raw material it is Immediately
transferred to the consumer by the
imposition of a tax Oh the manufac-
tured article. Even fiat ad valorem
tax on both raw material and manu-
featured products much more than
compensates the manufacturer for
the tax imposed on raw material be-
cause the raw material is but a part
Of the total value Of the article,
while an ad valorem tax is collected
on the entire value. Il Is impossible
to secure any great reduction III the
i
tariff on manufactured goods without