Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 38, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 October 1892 — SENATOR HILL’S SPEECH. [ARTICLE]

SENATOR HILL’S SPEECH.

I Strong Indorsement of Democracy MHI tho Party Nominee*. Senator Hill's Brooklyn speech to a itrong and telling argument in behaU of the Democratic party and its nominee* —Cleveland and Stevenson. Having stated the historical differences between Democracy and its opponent, whether the opponent was the old-time Federalist, the whig, or present Republicanism, Senator Hill addressed himself to the two great questions ot this time—the tariff and the force bill. The Senator is dear and cogent In bis presentation of the Democratic position with reference to the Republican fraud called protection. He demonstratee the position which Democracy haelong held and wtti continue to hold with reference to the raising of revenue at the customhouses* He assigned good reasons why a Democratic convention denounced Republican protection as a fraud. Theae he enumerated as follows: I. It is secured by a palpable abuse of the taxing power of tbe government. X It Inures to the benefit of the few at the oiDenie of the many, 3. It is based upon favoritianf ot the worst •peoiet. 4. It tends to create fictitious prosperity, to be followed by subsequent business depression. 5. It is deoeptive in its promisee and unsatisfactory in its results. 6. Us principal beneficiaries constitute a privileged class, and their importunities for governmental aid lead to publlo scandal and demoralisation.

The Senator showed that there is no purpose upon the part of the Democratic party to do other than raise Its revenue substantially ih the manner employed at present—that is, by custom house duties. There is no purpose of establishing free trade, an idea inconalstent with the existence of custom houses. He quoted Justice Miller of the Supreme Court:. "To lay with one hand the power of the government on the property of a citizen and with the other bestow It upon favored individuals, to aid private enterprise and build up private fortunes, la none the loss robbery because It is done under the formß of law and Is called taxation." He quoted Judge Cooley: “Constitutionally a tax can have no othor basis than the raising of revenue for publlo purposes, and whatever government has not this basis Is tyrannical and unlawful." He slated as the Demooratiu position belief In revenue with Incidental protection, and not in protection with Incidental revenue. So far as the tariff Is neoesrary to meet the needs of the government It may be imposed, and any other benefit which may be legitimately derived from Its imposition may and does necessarily acoompany It. When the Democratic party declares In favof of a tariff for revenueonly it means that the proper, main and only lawful and direct purpose of thetariff is the raising of revenue alone, a logical and correct position which, does not conflict with the idea of such Incidental advantage as necessarily and Inevitably may be received through a revenuetariff. For Illustration of what the Senator says let us assume that a purely revenuo duty Is imposed upon loiTee,, which Is not grown anywhere In theUnited Statoß. Would that afford any benefit Incidentally? It certainly would. The price of coffee being Inorc need by res son of the tariff tax Imposed upon It, just as the price ot sugar is reduced because the customs tax Imposed upon tt has obeen repealed In part, the consumer would look for substitutes for coffee. These substitutes would have the benefit through enhanoed price of the levy of a duty on ooffee. The Democratic party stands- to-day upon this question of the tariff where It stood In 1876. It Is no mono a freetrade party to-day than It was when Samuel J. TUden received more than 250,000 majority of the papular vote. Senator Hill quotes pointedly and pertinently from the oelebrated tariff message of President Cleveland directed to Congress In December, 1887. What the Democratic position would be to-day were it In control of the Government of tbe United State* 1* best Indicated by the latest full tariff bllb presented in 1888, and by tbe separatetariff bills passed by the present Democratic House of Representative*- and. received contumaciously by the Republican Senate. It Is not possible tomake a tariff bill In a plstfown, nor ot.n one in a doz*n statesmen .or publicist.*, er writers formulate a bill. That must bo done in tbe Committee on* Ways andi Means of the National House, but .taking its latest efforts at legislation—the’ Mills bill four years ago erfd the Springer bills of tbe present session—and, as the Senator indicates, they show what would be the Democratic position— « •tsntlsU °* R« should be suba. That luxuries should, bear, the heaviest burdens.

s. That there should he- free raw matanliletor the benefit at ear nuusnfaetutem 4. »at the tariff Mwa maunfaotnrec! strides ihould sea general rule be Uroer where similar ertlolee ere numafastursd fit thU country rAaii upon all manufactured articles (other tEan those which torrid r * MO , n A are placid on the free Met) should equal the difference between the rate of wage* Incidentally, Senator HBI ealls attention to the shifting positions of the sophists who maintain the fraud called Republican protection. Five years ago they were crying that ihe tariff was not a tax. Now they are endeavoring to show that they have relieved ue from taxation by abolishing the sugar duty. He exploded the sophistry about too protection of infant industries, a phrase which every citizen of his age baa heard from his earliest years, and he suggests that it Is high time that the fostering eare of the Government should be withdrawn and the infant Industries permitted to mature. A verdict upon MeKinleylsm was rendered two years ago by the people of too United States, but the Republican party has refused to obey the poputar verdict. A Democratic House of Representatives l has attached the worst features of McKinleyism by passing a fres-wool bill, a free binding-twins bill, and various other measures, but the will of the people, expressed by ite representatives an too House, has been Ignored. It is true, aa Senator Hill says, that the Republican# Insulted the people by asserting that too popular verdict had been produced by misrepresentation, that the people did not know their own mind, and it Is true that we must appeal again In this election to the people, and ask them to renew their expression of disapproval of the McKinley law. , The speech of Senator Hill is In all respects creditable to that gentleman and helpful of Demoera?y and of too canvass for Cleveland and Stevenson. lt will be helpful not only in New York, which may now be reasonably counted upon for Cleveland, but It will also bo of great advantage to the Democracy ol the West.