The gazette-times. [volume] (Heppner, Or.) 1912-1925, 1916-08-31
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND
THE TARIFF.

lTlOuU6-l uSiS hlS lhO "A ~
mocrats all over the country, who be
lieve that tariff that is protective OF
American industries is essential to
unbroken American prosperity. More
over. there are signs that there are
among these thousands some who are
credited with being leaders. But l,
is a fact. as declared by Mr.. Hughes
in one of his recent speeches that the
Democratic party is utterly incapaci-
tated to deal with this question, IN
any other way than to hold to tarifl
for revenue only
Anything other than that would
be directly contrary to wel-estab-
lished Democratic principle. To
prove that assertion, it is only neces-
sary to quote from the opening clause
of the Democratic platform at Balti-
more in 1912, upon which Woodrow
Wilson was elected president. We
quote: I'VE declare it to be a fun
damental principle of the Democratic
party that the Federal Government
under the constitution has no right
or power to impose or collect tariff
duties except for the purpose of re-
venue" etc.
Every man elected to the two hous-
es of Congress and the president him
self, before entering upon their Off
ces. must take an oath to uphold the
constitution. 1t therefore clearly
follows, that according to their inter-
pretation of the constitution, if Con-
gress should pass a protective tariff
any democrat who voted for it would
do it in violation of his official oath,
and if the president should sign such
bill, he would be guilty of a like
violation. Therefore, it is fair to
say that any party is incapacitated
from dealing with the tariff question.
in any way other than as producef
of revenue, for to do so would be a
declared violation of fundamentals
pTlUClple VI lue party.
There are those in the party, men
of prominence, would-be-leaders, who
would get around this masquerade"
law, under the provisions of which
imports of foreign commodities to be
sold in American markets in COM
petion with home producers, would
be limited. But that would be pro-
lection under another name, and the
names do not change facts or princi-
pies. It would be just like whipp-
ing the devil around stump. 1t is
too ridiculous to not be seen by men
of average intelligence.
All things considered, it it not
an unfair statement to make, that
the Democratic party is incapacitated
to deal with this question upon any
other theory than opposition to a
protective tariff because such a tariff
would be contrary to the "fundamen-
tai principles" of the party as de-
clared by the party representatives
four years ago. Unless the party
has changed its principles in that
time, it can give no protection to
American industries, and to attempt
it through the enactment of anti
dumping" laws which would be but
another name for doing what it has
denounced, and doing 1t in a far
less satisfactory manner.
1t is perfectly plain that if a majo-
rity of the people of the United States
believe the country should have a
tariff that would at least equalize the
home producer who pays American
wages, with the chances in our mar
kets, of the foreign producer who
has the advantage of cheap labor, it
must be done by party that stands
for a protective tariff and has al
ways SO stood.
If the voters of the country want
a protective tariff they know they can
have it by electing Hughes and with
him a Republican Congress. If they
want a tariff for revenue only, that
falls short of producing needed reye-
nue., they may have it by re-electing
Wilson and with him Congress that
will do his bidding, as the last two
congresses have been doing.