Democratic Sentinel, Volume 6, Number 32, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 September 1882 — VOORHEES. [ARTICLE]

VOORHEES.

The Indiana Senator on the Political Issues of the Day. Opening Speech of the Campaign at Terre Haute. Senator D. W. Voorhees opened the Indiana campaign by a speech at Dowling Hall, at Terre Haute. Notwithstanding the inclemency of the weather, the hall was packed. He was in good voice, and, after being introduced by CoL W. E McLean, held his audience for two hours in a speech of masterly force. His remarks were as follows: After a long and laborious session of Congress I rejoice that I am again in the midst of this generous people. You have not very strictly regarded party lines in your bearing toward me, and I shall endeavor to repay your kindness to-night by a candid discussion of a few propositions, with a perfect respect for the opinions and sensibilities of all who may not agree with me. If it is tliought to be somewhat early to commence a canvass at this time, I hope it will be remembered that the Republican leaders are already in the field. For months past the work of the Republican campaign for 1882 has been going on. The managers have not been talking to the people openly, as I am now, but they have found a new, aud, as they think, a more efficient way. They are proceeding by assessment. I once had a friend who believed that all legal proceedings should be by “replevin.” Jay Hubbell and his gang of organized looters believe that the perfection of American politics is now to be reached by assessment ; by putting people in office, and then putting the thumb-screws on them; by levying a per cent, of their wages with which to corrupt and carry elections; by blackmailing, under fear of losing their places, for that is what it is, to 100,000 officeholders, high and low, from the Cabinet to a tired waiter, rich and poor, old and young, male and female, white and black. I have seen it in operation. Not ten days before I left Washington a poor man, with a family, on $1,200 a year, came to his Senator to borrow sl2 with which to pay his assessment, in mortal dread of losing his place if he did not raise the money. Therefore, while the Republican leaders are writing civil-service-reform resolutions with one hand, and extorting a corruption fund with the other, it is incumbent on the Democratic party to move at once into the contest in the old way, appealing to the reason and judgment of the people. The last session of Congress had under consideration many

QUESTIONS OF GREAT MOMENT to the people. The President’s annual message in December last, accompanied by the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, I aimed a fatal blow at the existence of silver money, recommended that its coinage should cease,' and the silver certificate currency based on it and now in circulation be withdrawn. Had this policy been pursued about $70,000,000 of circulation at par with gold would have been retired, and contraction to that orctent would have taken place In the interest of those who wish money to be | scarce in order that its purchasing power j may be great and the rate of interest high. | The destruction of silver and the silver certificate as money, as well as the destruction of the greenback, has been and is still the ■ avaricious dream of the national banks, in order that the supply or non-supply of money to the country snail be in their own 1 hands. Tills was the great question when I I entered the Senate five years ago, and it is a J question which needs to be watched every ; day and hour at this time and for years to I come. The battle of the greenback and the silver dollar has been fought, and I have j ' borne my humble part in it. The cause of j the people has triumphed thus far, but I foresee another struggle in the near future. II spoke in December last in the Senate in de- { sense of silver money aud of the greenback. My first work in that body was to aid in ’ restoring the one to coinage and to protect \ the other from further retirement j I and destruction. For my course on these i questions many a venomous blow was aimed | at my head, not only by the common enemy, j the Republican party, but here and there by I a few claiming the name, without possessing I or comprehending any of the principles of j : Democracy. In every emergency I have appealed to the masses, and not to self-consti- j tuted dictators on the finances or any other questions. I shall do so in the future, and I ■ have no fears for the result. My Democracy : is a care for the many, for the laboring, pro- - ducing, active millions who gather the honey of wealth into the hive, and not for the I heavy-bodied, lordly drones who eat all and work none. Marshal Ney exclaimed with his ' dying breath that he had fought a hundred ' battles for France, and not one against her. I have fought as many battles for the Democratic party, and never one against her; but the inspiration of my Democracy is the welfare of the people, plenty of work and good I wages in the fields, in the workshops and the manufactories, comfortable homes, free from the Sheriff and the tax-gatherer, knowing nothing of mortgages about to be foreclosed, ! or scanty fare on their tables because of I hard times, but under their own vine and fig tree enjoying themselves, with their happy families about them, in their own way. If I the accomplishment of such results as these ■ does not constitute statesmanship, in mod- ■ ern parlance, the people at least will understand what it means, and with that I will be very content.

THE TARIFF—IT COLLECTS REVENUE AND ALSO PROTECTS. The Senator here turned his attention to the tariff. He said that because the present tariff was in many respects unjust, unequal and oppressive, it seemed that certain minds had jumped to the conclusion that we must have no tariff at all; that we must at once embrace that absolute impossibility in our affairs known as free trade. The present tariff calls for revision, and has been calling several years. A bill for its revision can only originate in the House, not in the Senate, and those who have had control of the House are responsible. But in any revision which takes place, or in the enactment of any new tariff, there is no escape from the principle that to the extent of the revenue collected it affords protection to the American labor in the manufacture of articles similar to those on which it levies import duties. This great fact must be admitted before intelligent legislation can take place. We are collecting over S2(X»,(KX),(XX) a year at our Custom Houses for the support of the Government. To that extent American manufacturers are protected, and no one can help it, without-abolishing all tarWC laws and resorting to direct taxation to make up the deficiency in the revenue. I hear that I am arraigned by the people who cannot or will not comprehend this subject for making a protective-tariff speech in the Senate. Will some one show me now to make a speech in fovor of any kind of a tariff which has no protection in it? And if in every tariff ever known, or that will ever be known, there is as much protection as there is revenue, which is as certain as the laws of mathematics, I should be glad to be informed why I may not claim for the people of Indiana' their honest share of such protection when they are paying their full share of such revenue. I stand on solid ground on

this issue, and Ido not expect to yield It. I wish things called by their right names. If you are for free trade, say so, and embrace the consequences. If you are for tariff at all, you are for a system of laws which col- I lects revenue and also protects American industries. You cannot imagine, much less devise, a tariff which does not perform both these useful functions. No man can answer this proposition; it has never been answered, and it never will be. Let us, then, like sensible people, recognize the element of protection as well as the element of revenue, and place it where it will do the most good to American interests. This is the principle formulated in the Democratic State platform of Aug. 2, and I stand squarely upon it. It is in harmony with the true interests of all classes in Indiana. The agricultural and manufacturing interests of Indiana are both very great, and I wish to see them prospering together in fraternity, and not engaged in jarring hostility. Mr. Voorhees then took up the platform of the two parties as adopted at their recent State conventions. He said he was very Eroud of Indiana, and was not aware that er constitution was so much in need of amendment as some claim it is. Thirty years that constitution has stood sheltering, blessing, educating and prospering the people. Thirty years ago it was framed by Democratic wisdom, and from that hour to this it has guaranteed justice, order, civil and religious liberty to ajl the citizens of the State.

In what respect has it failed * The progreis and development of Indiana under her present constitution are without a parallel m the United States, or in the world I have had occasion recently to examine this question and to make comparisons. In proportion to area Indiana has in the last thirty years, in the development of her gigantic resources, outstripped every other State in the Union. And all this splendid development of wealth, mental culture and exceptional morality has taken place bv virtue of the principles of the constitution which is now all of a sudden found so defective. The constitution is not only the offspring of a Democratic Constitutional Convention, as I have stated, but has been administered during more than twothirds of its existence bv Democratic hands. Need we be ashamed of our work* Need we shrink from a comparison with our sister States—with Maine, Kansas or lowa—who are covering themselves with sumptuary laws’ Are we sunk in vice, debauchery, crime and ignorance for the want of a prohibitory law* On the contrary, there is less crime, less vice and less ignorance in proportion to population in Indiana to day than in any prohibition State in the Union, and the cold figures of the census demonstrate it I for one do not want to amend the constitution of Indiana at all at this time. Its fruits, its results, please me. .It is only the good tree from which good fruits are gathered. “Men do not gather grapes from thorns, nor figs from thistles. ” But let us look a little closer at these two platforms on the subject of amending the constitution of the State. How has this issue been thrust upon the people ’? A Republican Legislature was, unfortunately for the peace and welfare of the State, elected in Indiana in 1881), and convened in January, 1881. Was that Legislature chosen on this issue * Did the people of Indiana elect the members of that body at that time with the expectation or understanding that an amendment to the constitution was to be thrust back in their faces, prohibiting utterly and forever the manufacture of all spirituous, vinous, malt or any other intoxicating liquors, such as hard cider, except for medical, scientific, mechanical and sacramental purposes ’ Was there a whisper of such a purpose in a single county or voting precinct in the State * If so I did not hear it, and I mingled with the people in that canvass from the lakes to the Ohio river, and from the Illinois to the Ohio line. No such issue was made anywhere. A Legislature, of its own conceit, and without a hint from the people, determined upon the gravest step a legislative body can take—the amendment of the fundamental law of a State. This issue, therefore, did not arise from the people; it came from no popular demand; it originated in no popular discussion; it sprang from no sense of public danger or need of reform. Looking merely at its origin and the manner in which it has come before the people, it is entitled to but little of their respect, for they did not call for nor expect it. And nothing could more clearly prove that this prohibitory amendment was an unwelcome and troublesome issue to the leaders of the Republican party in Indiana than the timid, dodging, evasive style of the Republican platform on the subject. That the Republican party intends to fasten this amendment on the constitution, if possible, there is no doubt, but that it is afraid to say so is equally clear. Did the Republican State Convention indorse in plain terms this Republican amendment* Not so. I have the resolution on the subject before me. It recognizes the fact that the people are divided as to the adoption or rejection of

THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT, and talks about the right of private judgmont. It demands, however, that the next Legislature shall agree to this and other amendments without reference to whether a majority of the members are for or against them, and without any reference at all. to the right of private judgment. It pretended that the absurd and' dishonest action on the i part of the Legislature is necessary in order I to secure a submission of this issue to a pop- I ular vote. That is to say, that a member of the Legislature elected this fall on this issue, and in opposition to the prohibitory amendment, and believing, as lie well may, that ; the Legislature has no constitutional power i to confiscate the property of law-abiding cit- . izens who pay heavy taxes for their rights, is yet required by this resolution, and in violation of his oath to support the constitution, to agree to the amendment. I am in favor.of every measure and form of submission known in the constitution itself. It is not necessary’ for me to say that I trust and believe in the people, in their absolute right and capacity’ to govern themselves; they know I do. In the exercise of this right of i self-government the people of Indiana have [ created and adopted a constitution which they’ respect and obey. By virtue of that < constitution the amendments proposed by I the last Legislature are now before the people, submitted to their scrutiny and discus- I sion, and they’ will be voted on in November at every poll in the State in the election of | candidates pledged for or against them. As to the subject of prohibition within i itself, whether it is wise or unwise, whether it falls within the true powers of government in its dealings with its citizens, whether it enhances the cause of temperance and morality, or the reverse, are matters on which there are wide and honest differences of opinion. In making laws to govern the | people it is the part of wisdom to recognize human nature as it is, a different standard from that created by the Almighty. As far as my reading extends I find that every people on the globe have believed themselves capable and entitled to determine what they would eat, drink and wear. These are the most fundamental rights of human nature. To deny them is to place man on the level with enslaved animals, whom you feed and shelter according to your wishes, and not theirs. This is the reason why prohibition, so-called, never prohibits The instinct of self-government is strong in every man’s heart, and he at once revolts against such an intrusion upon his right of private judgment and self-control. Twenty-eight years ago I was just entering upon the affairs of life, and the party’ opposed to the Democracy at that time was a mongrel composed of prohibition and Know-Nothingism in about equal parts. I witnessed the temporary triumph and the speedy death of this combination party. The attempt to enforce the , Maine law, as it was then called, in Indiana in 1854 was a miserable and demoralizing farce. Nothing is worse in its effects on the public morals than a law which is a dead letter; a law which it is the sworn duty of courts and juries to enforce, and which they will not enforce. This was the case in Indiana in 1854, and will be again if prohibition is adopted. It is the case now to a greater or less extent in every State where prohibition nominally prevails. Hypocrisy, fraud, contempt of law, with all their kindred evils, always accompany such a state of things. The daily laborer may be deprived of his beer, but' the man who is able will send to Kentucky for his whisky, which under the amendment he can keep and drink to his heart’s content, so he does not keep it for sale. The adoption of this amendment will not keep a drop of whisky or brandy or foreign costly wines out of the State which any’ one wants to bring here to drink. It will simply stop the manufacture for sale, and close up the vineyards and breweries which Jefferson, and every other philosophic mind regarded as great mitigations of the evils of intemperance.

PENSIONS AND ARREARS. The speaker next noticed the subject of pensions and arrears of pensions, which had been under consideration during the last session of Congress, and on which he had been assailed in the most prominent papers in the United States. He had spoken earn estly in his place in the Senate on this subject, and he never expected to change his position or his opinions. The money ppid out in arrears of pensions had increased the general currency of the country, and made times easier and more prosperous. For that very reason the payment of this money had been so savagely denounced by the great organs of capital. They do not want the times easy or money plenty in the hands of the people. Who have denounced the arrears of pensions? What convention of the people has done so? It is the money power, and that alone which' has done sb. I claim .no credit for what I have done or tried to do for the soldier. I deserve no man's vote .on that account. I have simply tried to do my plain and sacred duty. I shall continue the same course hereafter, and I here admonish the soldier that he will always need brave and vigilant friends in the American Congress. On the very last day of the sessioA 1 provoked the furious wrath of certain Senators by moving to take up and pass the bill which' hail already passed the House, giving the loser of a leg'or arm SWper month. The vital statistics show that such sufferers average a loss of twenty years on the duration of life, and I conceive a pension of S4U per month but a small compensation for such early graves. In the discussion which ensued our pension system was fiercely denounced os beatowing too much money on jibe

wounded soldiers of the war and on theil widows and orphans. Thpse denunciations c une from the representatives of organized Eastern capital However long or short my stay in the Senate may bo, no one need ever be in doubt as to what my position will be on this and kindred question*. We now and then hear ft stated that the Democratic party iB, or has been, or soon will be, A FREE-TRADB PARTT. As Gen Hancock said, only too late, in the campaign of 1880, all such talk is folly, rhe position I hold on this subject is sustained in express words and in elaborate arguments bv every Democratic President ever elected, beginning with Thomas Jefferson and ending with James Buchanan, every one of whom also carried the great manufacturing State of Pennsylvania. I could stand here and read to you by the hour an unbroken chain of Democratic authority, from the very beginning of the present century until the last Presidential canvass, showing that the position of the Democratic party has always been in favor of a tariff tor revenue, with protection to our home industries to the extent of that revenue. On the floor of the Senate I said: “The tariff is a method of taxation; it has its origin in the power of tho Government to raise money for the public service, but, like every’ other system of taxej ever known in history, its resulting consequences reach far and wide among the people; it touches, takes hold upon, and encourages or depresses their diversified interests; and this great consequent fact, this vast incident as it may be called, can no more bo evaded, ignored or pushed aside in legislating for the general good of the country than the primary fact of the revenue itself Again I said, and I repeat it here: “I speak not in support of a tariff for revenue only, nor of a tariff for protection only, but in support of a tariff which collects the necessary revenue, and, at the same time, to the extent of that revenue extends protection with discriminating justice to American manufactories." There I nail my colors, and there they will stay, through sunshine and storm, victory or defeat. If these views make me unsafe and unsound in the estimation of impractical theorists, I have the satisfaction of believing that I am promoting the best interests of the thoughtful, sensible business and laboring people of Indiana, and that my appeal to them for support, if I should ever again make it, will not be made in vain. I will rejoice to answer for my stewardship on this great question to the people of this grand ami growing commonwealth. Their trust and confidence ore all that I have ever aspired to, or ever will this side of the river which divides time from eternity. When the hour of reckoning comes I will enter upon it with a conscience which tells me in clear and certain tones that I have toiled by day and by night in my present position to promote the prosperity, the happiness and the glory of this great and beloved Htate. What has been best for her I have done or tried to do. I have not thought free trade and direct taxation best. I have not thought it best for her laboring men and women to be brought into competition with the pauper labor of England and other foreign countries, and this I have dared to sav, and shall say again and again. On the basis of free trade, direct taxation follows as inevitably as darkness follows the night, and between SB,(XX),(MX) and SIO,(XX),(XX) a year must fall to the taxgatherers to collect in Indiana, and over S3(X),(XX) in Vigo county. 1 have not thought that best for our Htnte and people, and, as there has been some talk in that direction, I have taken some pains to arrest such evil tendencies. At the conclusion of the Senator’s address Hon. J. E. Lemb, the Democratic candidate for Congress in the district, was introduced and delivered an eloquent and argumentative speech.