Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-10-24
DOES WILSON REPUD|ATE
DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM :!
Open Letter to Hon. Woodrow Wilson, Cam
didate OF Democratic Party for Presi-
dent, from Charles D. Hilles, Chair
man Republican Natl. Com.
New York, Oct. o. 1912.
Hon, Woodrow Wilson,
Trenton, New Jersey.

Trenton, New Jersey,
Sir
The platform of your party on the
tariff this year is extremely destrue-
tive and disturbing. This is what the
Democratic party now says to the
people on this question:
We declare ii to be a. fundamental
principle OF the Democratic party that
The Federal government under the Con-
s;ituti0n has no right or power to i'm
pose or collect tariff duties, except for
the purpose of revenue, and we de-
mand that the collection Of such taxes
shah be limited to the necessities Of
government honestly and economically
administered t4
This is a declaration that protective
tariff duties are unconstitutional II
the Democrats believe this they must
if successful, proceed without delay to
sweep them away. This means to put
our industries and occupations on a
cree Trade basis ruthlessly and with
out regard TO business or economic
considerations. This platform declar-
alton by your party unquestienably
means that, having been balffed in
Their many attempts to convince the
American people that protective du-
ties We're not good for them ON econo-
mic grounds, your party now aban-
dons the appeal to economies aKi
erags in the Constitution in their as
SAINT ON protection. This position is
revolutionary. For a hundred years
protective tariff duties have been ac-
cepted as constitutional To have
them declared unconstitutional now
would be TO suddenly stop and dis
mantle the wheels of progress in our
country and leave only uncertainty
and weakness where there had been
confidence, enterprise and strength
This would be deplorable economic
revolution and retrogression.
Yet you and your candidacy stand
upon this platform declaration. You
apparently accept and endorse 1t. You
must do so unless you clearly reject it,
Do you repudiate it? If you do not
you must be reekonad with as a free
trader seeking toshaVe all protective
tariff duties outlawed. This is po-
sition Which seriously threatens the Sc
curly and prosperity of the country.
Injustice of Democratic Tariff Bills.
Yeer personal position in this mat
ter and the declarations eff y0air party
cause the record of your party in ac-
tuaslg handling tariff mattss's is 50 un-
fortunate and SO reclslessly Unfair. You
and your followers seek 10 assure the
people that they should be trusted with
The d.ficult ana delicate work &c tar-
Tiff revision. Yet they have just shown
~ Ihele Official acts that tlyes- viii not
be fair and Just in tins matter. The
Democratic parts controls the present
House of Representatives by sub
stantiai ma ority, and has, with 2 free
hand, framed and passed a number OF
tariff pills since the assembling of the
present Congress.
The actions of the Democratic party,
rather than their words. show rs @fat
we have to expect from them. The
platform of this party IN 1913 promised
q gradual revision OF duties Ii the par
~ should be entrusted with power by
The elections OF 1910 they were entrust-
ed with power IN the House of Hepte-
sentatices which originates tariff biils'
The party hastcpe1 TO use is power.
Did they attempt a gradual or sys-
tematic revision of the tariff BY no
means. They forced through series
of tariff bills constituting nasty
piecemeal rceision--really not reVls-
ion at ali. out crude, slao-dasl ana
reckless slashing of duties, involving
many very Eeavv reductions and the
nlacing of many articles on the Tree
list al one bound and against every
dictate of reason and ius,ice.
Harder Than Free Trade Would Be.
81 3 $ The leader Of your party yea must
have inow ledge OF these extra9td binary
taIiff bills. which, By practically un-
animous Democratic vete, were passed
through the House of Representatives,
These bills cut dawn and wiped out
duties without their authors kaoN4ns
what they were doing. The sweepinS
re6uotians would have torn down ak
once what had been patiently ana
carefully built up during many years,
Finished articles, requiring highly
skilled labor. were hastily put on the
free list and this, in many cases, even
when the necessary materials fer max
ing them were left dutiable.
For example. in the Democratic bill
revising the metal schedule maehihe
tools were placed on the free INST.
while the steel from which such tools
are made was left dutiable. type
writer's and cash registers were placed
on the free list. Printing presses sew
ing machines, and other finished ar
ticles, were made free of duty at
blow. Cotton ties, spikes, nuts, wash
ers, cut lacks, horse shoes, various
kirdssof nails, many kinds of wire, and
other similar articles were slammed on
the free list. But the steel and other
materials from which such articles
must be made We're left subject TO
duty. Gould ANYTHING be more unfair
and disastrous to the industries anu
workers all over the country engaged
in making the articles thus suddenly
deprived Of all protection? Thousands
of small industries were thus forced
without warning right up to the very
brink of free trade 1t would nave
been, in fact, even harder and more
unfair than general free trade would
be.
The Danger of All Workers.
What can the workers in these IN
dustries think of these unfair at
lacks ON them? What must the
workers in any industry or oecu-
patton think? If they know the facts
tI,x.1r ,,,,,ct halfava ttat in the event of