Democratic Sentinel, Volume 19, Number 13, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 April 1895 — CAUSE OF THE SLUMP. [ARTICLE]

CAUSE OF THE SLUMP.

HARD TIMES AND DEMOCRATIC STAY-AT-HOMES DID IT. What the Analysis of Election Returns Showa-All Talk of Repealing the Income Tax Is Pure Vaporing— Cleveland and the Bond Issue. Vote Will Return in *O6. The vote in the recent State elections has been sufficiently canvassed so that it is possible to make comparisons and arrive at somewhat definite conclusions in regard to the causes of the country’s apparent backslide into protectionism. The greatest changes occurred in tlie Northern and Eastern States, and it is in these States that we cau see most clearly the general causes of the changes. In many of the Southern and Western States one or the other of the two great parties was to win votes by borrowing planks from tills party's platform. Hence the changes in theresults are more irregular and uncertain than in the North or East Comparing the results in 1894 and 1892 in the more important of the Northern and Eastern States, and including Maryland, Delaware, Virginia and West Virginia, we have: Dem. Btay-at-Dem. Rep. home Loss. Pet. Gains. Pct. vote. New York .. .100,064 15 04,162.. 85,002 New Jersey. . 55,6'17 .32 7,755 5 47,042 Connecticut.. 16,063 16% 6,062 0 0,181 Maas 52.883 30 718,507 6 52,883 New Hamp.. 8,057 10 048 2 7,100 Penn'a 118,800 27 58,700 11 00,070 Ohio 127,133 84 8,801 2 118,332 Indiana 24,085 10 17,170 7 6,015 Illinois 103,801 25 58,508 15 45,208 Wisconsin . . 35,503 20 25,474 15 10,020 Minnesota .. 47,000 50 25,208 20 21,702 Maryland ... 0,611 0 3,082 5% 5,620 Delaware .. *6B .. 1,803 10 Virginia ....50,625 30 724,070 21 50,625 W. Virginia.. 8,201 10 5,515 7 2,780 •Guin. VLosa. The Democratic loss in these fifteen States averages 22 per gent., and the Republican gain 8 per cent. It is the almost unanimous opinion of those who have studied the history that “hard times” always causes a loss of votes to the party lu power no matter which party was responsible for the “hard times.” Though the Democratic party may have been partly responsible (because of a few black sheep) for their duration, no sane person whose opinion is worth anything will deny that the “hard times” was a result of Republican legislation or lack of legislation. The Republicans had been in power for thirty years. Not only did the panic begin before a single Republican law had been changed, but the financial stringency was felt so much before the close of Harrison’s administration that his Secretary of the Treasury had made preparations to issue bonds. Five per cent, is a low estimate for the Democratic loss and Republican gain because of hard times. There is then left a Democratic loss of 17 and a Republican gain of 3 per cent to be explained by other causes.

Aside from State and local causes, which cut no small figure in the general result, it is probable that after “hard times” the four most important causes were Democratic delay in Congress, the sugar scandal, conservatism of Democratic Senators and Congressmen on the tariff question, and changes of belief as to the benefits of protection. The first three of these causes operated In keeping Democrats at home, and the last in changing Democratic (formerly) into Republican votes. Hadjt not been for the Democratic voters who staid at home, the result in most States would have been very close. Add to these non-voting Democrats those who in New York, Ohio New Jersey and Maryland voted the Republican ticket, in. order to “turn down” some of the Democratic traitors who blocked tariff legislation, and It becomes evident that there are to-day enough Democrats left to carry a majority of the Northern States on the tariff issue. The result, then, is neither a Republican nor a protectionist victory, but merely a Democratic slump. Comparatively few of the voters have actually become afraid of tariff reform and voted the Republican ticket because they wished to return to McKinleyisin. Some of these, and most of the five per cent, who changed sides blindly because of hard times, will return to the Democratic party by 189(1, if this party rids itself of those who have betrayed and disgraced it. Let the Democratic party stand by tariff reform and tariff reformers and the people will stand by the party.—Byron W. Holt.

A Tax to Stay. The talk about repealing the income tax or preventing its collection by withholding the appropriation necessary to its collection is pure vaporing. The income tax is here to stay. The Treasury Is in need of the revenue it will yield. Its principle is just It will oppress none and relieve many. No Republican leader of prominence ventured to denounce it during the late canvass. As for the voice of the people, what was the verdict in the States whose Democratic Senatoiu and Representatives declaimed and voted against the income tax. Senator Hill was the most bitter and persistent opponent of this just tax. Senator Murphy joined with him and insisted furthermore upon MeKinleyizlng the Wilson bill for the benefit of his own home and pocket If the people of New York approved of this course of their Senators they took a queer way of showing it in burying Mr. Hill under more than 150,000 majority. Senator Smith, of New Jersey, himself a member of the plutocratic class that believes in taxing everybody rather than itself, was likewise very hostile to the income tax. New Jersey repudiated him by more than 40,000 majority. Senator Brice, of Ohio, was a leading spirit in the combine of false Democrats who held up the Wilson bill and tried to defeat the income tax. Ohio served notice to quit on Brice by a majority so big that the Democrats were glad to stop counting it. There were other causec ut work, of course, but no warrant can be drawn from the election in any State that the • people are dissatisfied with the income tax. It may hereafter be graded and , otherwise Improved, but it will not be repealed.—New York World. A Collcae Opinion. And here comes President Seth-Low of Columbia College, who says be is and has always been a Republican, but that he has voted twice for Mr. Cleveland on ttM tariff issue. Interpreting

the late election, he remarks that It would not be candid to pretend that there has been no reaction against tariff reform. There has been such a reaction, and President Low seems to agree with Chairman Wilson that it reflects an unreasoning consideration of the question rather than deliberation by the people. He is a pretty good tariff reformer yet, and he is confident that there will be no step backward.—New York Times. Cleveland on Bond Issues. The President’s statement in regard to the issue of bonds is not all In the nature of an apology. It is simply to the. effect that the gold reserve was so much reduced and its further reduction in the near future seemed so certain that Its replenishment became necessary in order to maintain the public credit. It would have been well If Congress had made provision for such an emergency by authorising the Issue of low-rate, short-time bonds. But Congress had not done this, and nothing was left but to sell bonds again under the resumption act. Tills was done on terms which reduced the rate of interest on the money actually borrowed below 3 per cent. That is the whole story. But the President proceeds to show how, under existing laws, the same greenbacks can be used again and again to clean out the reserve. “We have an endless chain in operation.” ns he aptly puts it, “constantly depleting the treasury’s gold and never near a final rest.” And in addition to the obligation to redeem greenbacks in gold as often as they may be presented we have the obligation to maintain the silver circulation at par with gold, and this subjects the reserve to another drain. There is no other way to maintain the reserve than by the sale of bonds; "and yet Congress has not only thus far declined to authoring the issue of bonds best suited to such a purpose but there seems a disposition in some quarters to deny botli the necessity and the power for the issue of bonds at all." And yet the President does not repeat his request for authority to issue suitable bonds or to retire legal tenders when they are redeemed. Instead of that he simply says that so long as no better way js provided the authority conferred by the act of 1875 “will be utilized whenever and as often as it becomes necessary to maintain a sufficient reserve, and in abundant time to save the credit of our country and make good the financial declarations of our government.” He has called the attention of Congress to the subject with all due respect heretofore, and it has done nothing. It has left him under a very disagreeable necessity, and he may be excused if he does not mince matters In stating the situation and his duty in circumstances for which Congress and not he is responsible.—Chicago Herald.

Free Fuel a Necessity I It should go without saying that every bushel of coal which Americans directly or Indirectly use Is now taxed. "Protectionists” intimate that because there Is no duty on anthracite coal It is not affected by the tariff. But It is certain that if the present tax was taken off bituminous coals the prices of anthracite would come down. The tariff on imported soft coals tends to exclude them from many markets, and thus to give anthracite a virtual monopoly. The tax on all coals Is, moreover, complex. It is repeated every time we buy any article in making which coal Is used. Ami this oft-multiplied tax greatly Increases the cost of living to every one In America. Free coal is a pressing necessity to our manufacturers—to enable them to produce their fabrics cheaply enough to compete witli foreign goods in both the home and foreign markets. It is necessary to lighten the cost of transporting farm products to market,which cost is deducted from the very slim profits now realized by our farmers. It is a necessity for our steam-shipping. Free coal would also be an inestimable boon to all householders, especially to the poor. The Senate should pass the free coal bill next week, before winter's blizzards begin to blow. Hard Times and Parties. Not even McKinley proposes to act the McKinley tariff. There is no talk of renewing the silver-purchase act. If a new force bill is to be passed, the Republican leaders are keeping their intentions from the public. What, then, was the cause of the Democratic overturn? Will not the “hard times,” for which the parties in power are always held responsible, sufficiently account for the remarkable voting of 1894? The hard times were felt in every part of the country, and in every part of the country there was the name story of Democratic disaster. This is nothing new. No matter what party in power, nor what causes at the root of trade depression, it is as natural for the voters to seek for a remedy in a change of administration as it is for a drowning man to grasp at straws.— Philadelphia Record. Tariff Reform Stands. It is hard to understand how Republicans can have the nerve to declare that they will not bother with the tariff, after their calamity howls to the workingmen in the last campaign. But they have; and as abandonment of McKinleyism is a good thing in any party, all we can say is: Push it along. William L. Wilson has been defeated. Grover Cleveland has been abused and caricatured. They can smile, for the mighty deed of tariff reform stands. Republicans know that tariff reform will not now go backward. They are cunning enough to see that after the new tariff is tried business and industry will forbid a reversal to trammeled trade. It Is a glorious victory and the temporary defeat of Democratic candidates is nothing In comparison. From a Republican Authority. The Chicago Tribune predicts th.it “when the Republican National convention meets in June of 1896, |o tell the voters what the Republican party xvlll gio If successful in the fall, neither Senator Cullom nor any other man will demand that the McKinley bill be made the Issue of the campaign, and that the people be asked tQ vote, not against the Wilson-Gorman bill, but for the McKinley bill. Not one of them will dare to do it He will remember 1890 and 1892, and will refuse to blunder a third ttax M