E 710 
 .07 
 Copy 1 
 
 
 len^ 
 
 e'er; ,V 
 
 
 -^?S^EfeCH OF 
 
 JOSIAH QUINCY, 
 
 Chairman of Democratic State Convention. 
 
 Worcester, October 2, 1895. 
 
 Felloio-Demucnits of MussachuseUs : — We meet this year in our annual con- 
 vention under conditions far more encouraging and hopeful for our party than 
 those which have confronted us during the last two years. Industry, commerce, 
 and finance have very largely emerged from the cloud of doubt and depression 
 that has hung over them, and are again in the sunlight of prosperity. The Demo- 
 cratic party is casting off the political discouragement which has accompanied 
 conditions that have now passed by. I shall cite no evidence of the wonderful 
 revival of business, bringing with it higher prices, fuller employment, and better 
 wages, that has taken place during the last six months, because even Republicans 
 are forced to concede its existence. Of the revival of Democracy throughout the 
 nation we trust to show conclusive evidence on election day. 
 
 Great as was the tidal wave under which we were buried last year, it was 
 hardly greater than that which overwhelmed the Republican party in 1890. I 
 think we shall find that it has so far subsided this year that, if the same rate of 
 retrogression continues for another year, the Democratic party will again be victo- 
 rious in the presidential election of 181^0. Republicans who hastily assumed after 
 the election of 180-1 tiiat they had no longer to meet an effective opposition from 
 the Democratic party, and that they could afford to indulge in quarrels among 
 themselves for personal or factional supremacy, are likely to find their assump- 
 tions unfounded. 
 
 Democracy never surrenders. Its defeats of the last two years were inflicted 
 more by Democrats than by Republicans. But that any considerable number of 
 Democrats have abandoned the principles of their party and been converted to 
 
£"7/0 
 
 Hepublicanism I do not for a moment believe. The causes which produced this 
 political dissatisfaction or indifference — and business depression accounts for 
 more than three-quarters of it — now lie behind us. Our political future is again 
 bright with promise. 
 
 We can see no reason to believe that the voters of the country have changed 
 their opinion of the modern principles of the Republican party,— an opinion delib- 
 erately formed and twice unmistakably expressed. We can see no evidence that 
 the same Republicanism which was so unpopular in 1890 and 1892 has gained 
 any real, positive, lasting strength with the people since that time. 
 
 OLD ISSUES DEAD. 
 
 Upon what issues can the Republican party ask the country to restore it to 
 power next year ? What political policy or programme can it present in opposi- 
 tion to that of the party in power as a basis for its appeal to the people V Of the 
 old issues upon which it formerly carried the country not one is left. 
 
 The sectional issue upon which Republicanism so long succeeded is fortu- 
 nately dead and buried forever. The rebel brigadier no longer serves as a bug- 
 bear. The bloody shirt has been sent to the political wash-tub. Upon the battle- 
 fields where they once met in mortal combat the veterans of the blue and the 
 gray are completely reunited. Time has done its full and perfect work. 
 
 The issue of the federal control of elections, which in the last national cam- 
 paign was almost as prominent a feature in the Republican policy as the mainte- 
 nance of McKinleyism, seems to have dropped completely out of sight. la an 
 article in the Forum for April, 1891, Senator Hoar declared that the purpose to 
 keep the promise to secure honest elections by the exercise of the national legisla- 
 tive authority " is the one essential thing that constitutes Republicanism." If 
 this be true, Republicanism appears to have lost its essence; for, with every 
 vestige of federal control of elections swept from the statute book by a Demo- 
 cratic Congress, the revival of this issue seems to be the last thing that the Re- 
 publican leaders propose. 
 
 The chairman of the Executive Committee of their national organization, com- 
 ing from the State of Tom Reed, even declares, with a brutal disregard of tli^^ feel- 
 ings of our Massachusetts senators, that it was a mistake ever to raise it. it really 
 seems as if the Republican party had learned one lesson, and had been converted, on 
 grounds of expediency, if not of principle, to the Democratic position on this ques- 
 tion of fundamental importance. If the Democratic party had accomplished noth- 
 ing else by its victory of 1892 than to settle the question of federal control of elec- 
 tions, and save the country from one of the greatest dangers that ever threatened 
 its political future, it would still be entitled to the gratitude and support of the 
 people. 
 
 Another Republican plea that has done good service in the past is also elimi- 
 
3 
 
 nated from future political contests. Two Democratic administrations have 
 effectually disposed of the claim that this country only contained one political 
 party capable of carrying on its government wiih safety. Party contests now 
 stand upon a proper and normal basis. The political monopoly of the Republican 
 party has been permanently broken down. The people know that they have a free 
 choice between two parties, each of which is able to carry on the government with 
 entire safety to the country; and they will decide between them according to their 
 political preferences and according to the records of the two parties in office. 
 
 Of the pension question, whicii has in the past figured to a considerable ex- 
 tent among Republican campaign issues, there is very little left. Pension legisla- 
 tion is practically completed. Any further changes must be of comparatively 
 narrow scope, and can hardly be made a party issue. So far as the administration 
 of the Pension Office is concerned, it is scarcely pretended that there is any case 
 from the standpoint of the veteran against the gallant Union soldier whom the 
 President has placed at its head. Even Corporal Tanner, who helped the surplus 
 disappear so successfully, concedes that he is a good official ; and applications have 
 been so rapidly acted on under his administration that the expected diminution 
 through deaths in the number of pensioners has been postponed. 
 
 FOREIGN RELATIONS. 
 
 In regard to questions arising out of our foreign relations, while some Repub- 
 lican leaders have shown a disposition to improve every chance to oppose the ad- 
 ministration in this field, nothing but the Hawaiian question has yet been raised 
 to the dignity of even a minor issue. The Democratic administration and the 
 Democratic party are squarely opposed to the annexation of these islands, with 
 their mixed population and their coolie labor system. The Republican party is 
 entitled to the support of all who believe that the annexation of Hawaii to this 
 country is not only desirable, but is of such supreme importance that it outweighs 
 the great questions of our home politics. 
 
 There is no question involved as to whether American influence shall remain 
 paramount in those islands, for that it must in any case continue to be; or as to 
 whether any other country shall be allowed to acquire them, for we have de- 
 clared that this cannot be permitted; nor is there any question as to the form of 
 the Hawaiian government. It is simply a question of formal annexation, with all 
 the difficult problems which that would rai.se, as opposed to the maintenance of 
 the present status. It would be a poor compliment to the iiiteliigence of xVnieri- 
 can voters to assume that they would allow such a question to be an appreciable 
 factor in the election of their President and the settlement of their national 
 policies. 
 
 What further issues of foreign policy the Republican leaders may attempt to 
 raise, to cover up the weakness of their position on domestic questions, we can 
 
ouly conjecture ; but this we know, that, with Secretary Olney at the head of the 
 State Department, they are going to find it hard to place the administration in 
 any vulnerable position, and it is quite within the bounds of probability that they 
 may be glad to drop all discussion of foreign questions before another year has 
 passed. In this connection a few words upon a matter of present interest pertain- 
 ing to our foreign relations, though not as yet having any partisan aspect, may 
 not be out of place. The question of the political future of Cuba, again brought 
 prominently forward by the insurrection now in progress in that island, is one to 
 which the people of this country cannot be indifferent. While there are no good 
 reasons for concerning ourselves especially with the affairs of the Hawaiian 
 Islands, thousands of miles distant in the middle of the Pacific, there are strong 
 reasons to lead us to take an interest in the future of this great island, with its 
 extraordinary natural resources and advantages, lying within only a few miles of 
 our coast. 
 
 While our government must proceed in accordance with the obligations of 
 international law, the sentiment of our people can at least claim free utterance. 
 Spanish rule in Cuba at the close of the nineteenth century is a political anomaly 
 and anachronism. There is no territory in this hemisphere of anything like 
 the importance, population, or wealth of Cuba, that has not long been either 
 entirely independent of European rule or practically self-governing. If the 
 letter of the Monroe doctrine practically forbids the further acquisition of Amer- 
 ican territory by any European power, its spirit calls for American sympathy 
 with such an effort as that which Cuba is now making to throw off European 
 control. That Spain has, by her misgovernment of Cuba, furnished ample justi- 
 fication for revolt, few will deny. The immediate question is whether such a 
 state of war exists as to justify our government in recognizing the insurgents as 
 belligerents, and according them belligerent rights, thus greatly strengthening 
 their chances of success. I believe that the general sentiment of our people is 
 strongly in favor of giving them such recognition as soon as sufficient information 
 is secured to warrant that action without violation of the principles of interna- 
 tional law ; and it should not be forgotten that it took Spain ten years to put 
 down the last insurrection. 
 
 Probably this country would not, under any circumstances, assume the 
 responsibility of the government of Cuba, either by its acquisition by purchase 
 from Spain, if that were possible, or by its admission to the Union on the 
 application of its people. But we can all agree that Cuba ought to be com- 
 mercially annexed to the United States, and that this would be of great benefit 
 to the peoples of both countries. Such a natural commercial union is incon- 
 sistent with the exploitation of Cuba for the benefit of Spain, and must depend 
 upon the success of the effort to throw off Spanish rule. If we must remember 
 our obligations to a nation with which we are at peace, we need not forget the 
 claims of humanity and liberty. 
 
CURRENCY AND FINANCE. 
 
 Coming now to the leading political questions, the contest that has raged 
 over the currency claims our first attention. Have the Republican leader.^, who 
 are so fond of pointing out Democratic shortcomings, cast petty politics and 
 partisan interests aside, and stood squarely behind the administration in its 
 efforts in behalf of sound money? Have they done their share in the campaign 
 of popular education upon this subject ? Have they so clearly declared the posi- 
 tion of their party, by their utterances, by their Congressional action, and by 
 the platforms of its conventions, that they could not be accused of fishing in 
 troubled waters with the hope of catching votes? 
 
 Let their silence answer; let Tom Reed's squirming when he had to face 
 the issue of a gold standard in Congress in connection with the last bond issue ; 
 let the course of the much heralded Cleveland Convention of Republican Clubs, 
 which evaded the silver question by discovering at the last moment that it would 
 be unconstitutional to say anything about it ; let the unrestrained and unrebuked 
 activity of the chairman of the Republican National Committee in behalf of 
 free silver. 
 
 Turn to the record of the Democratic administration. The country has been 
 passing through a period of financial disturbance, when absolute firmness on the 
 part of the head of the government in support of sound money has been worth 
 untold millions to our business interests. The positive knowledge of those con- 
 trolling our own financial markets and furnishing the loans upon which business 
 is so largely done, as well as of the foreign holders of a vast quantity of our 
 securities, that at whatever cost, in money or in popularity, against whatever 
 opposition, in Congress or out of it, every power of the Executive would be ex- 
 hausted to maintain all our forms of currency at a parity with each other, and 
 redeemable in gold at the option of the holder, has been our rock of safety. 
 
 Confidence is the basis of all business. Shaken to its foundation by the 
 effects of the Sherman silver law, it has been restored since the repeal of that law 
 by the firmness and wisdom with which our treasury has been protected and kept 
 in a position to meet all its obligations. In a situation where weakness would 
 have been fatal and compromise would have been surrender. President Cleveland 
 has stood firm, — first for the unconditional repeal of the law which brought on 
 the trouble, then for the use of the public credit, to any extent, to preserve the 
 financial honor of the country. — with the assistance of Congress, if possible, but 
 without it, if necessary. 
 
 And we can also congratulate ourselves as Democrats upon the sound and 
 outspoken position that our party is taking in the country upon the currency 
 question. Thanks to the unyielding and uncompromising attitude of the admin- 
 istration, there can no longer be any question that the Democratic National Con- 
 vention of 189ii will be as sound in its utterance upon the silver question as was 
 
the Democratic Convention of 1892. Whatever Democratic silver conventions, so 
 called, have been held, it should not be forgotten that there is no power anywhere 
 to place the Democratic party on any other ground than that on which it stood 
 at Chicago in 1892, when it made a declaration absolutely inconsistent with the 
 free and independent coinage of silver at a ratio of 16 to 1. The supporters 
 of that heresy, by whatever political name they may call themselves, are in direct 
 opposition to the last authoritative utterance of the Democratic party on the ques- 
 tion of silver currency. 
 
 Without a Chief Executive of such a character, and a Secretary of the Treas- 
 ury in entire harmony with him, this battle could never have been brought to a 
 successful issue. Through misrepresentation and abuse, through open attacks 
 and secret opposition, the administration has kept upon the even tenor of its way, 
 upholding always the financial honor of the country and the soundness of its cur- 
 rency. 
 
 The management of the finances and of the currency of the country is safer 
 in Democratic than in Republican hands for the following reasons, among 
 others : — 
 
 1. However the Democratic party may sometimes fall short of an ideal stand- 
 ard in the practice of public economy, its professed doctrines at least are in that 
 direction ; and its record shines by comparison with that of the Republican party. 
 Economy in public expenditures is one of its historic principles, and whatever 
 forces there are in the country to oppose reckless extravagance are found within 
 its ranks. It is only a few years since the Republican party deliberately squan- 
 dered a surplus, in order to maintain a high tariff ; and it will doubtless now en- 
 deavor to maintain a deficit, in order that its existence may serve as an excuse for 
 the restoration of higher duties. With its paternalistic and centralizing tenden- 
 cies, that party constantly finds new ways for spending the money of the people. 
 
 2. The Republican party has furnished to the country no political leader 
 whose record for consistent, uncompromising, and aggressive soundness upon the 
 currency question, regardless of all partisan considerations, compares with that of 
 Grover Cleveland ; and his financial record belongs to the party which has three 
 times, with full knowledge of his views, deliberately made him its candidate for 
 the Presidency, and has twice elected him to that office. A party which stands 
 behind such a leader, even though it contains a minority which dissents from his 
 policy, is safer than a party which, claiming to be the sole guardian of sound 
 financial principles, is always compromising when it should fight; a party which 
 inflicted upon the country the untold disasters resulting from the Sherman silver 
 law, in order to keep the silver producers within its party lines, and to save its 
 President from the danger of having to act upon a free coinage bill. 
 
 3. The principles of the Democratic party require the withdrawal of the 
 treasury from the banking business and the retirement of all forms of fiat money. 
 In the words of our State platform of last year, we believe " that it is the sole 
 
function of the federal government in monetary matters to provide a standard ot 
 value, and to coin metallic money, every dollar of which shall be of equal intrinsic 
 value ; that nothing but this coined money shall be a legal tender, and that the 
 government shall not carry on a banking business." Tiie recent platform of the 
 Democracy of the State of New York has joined in the demand for the retirement 
 of the greenbacks, and there is every indication that tlie national Democratic party 
 will be committed to this programme. The Republican party, on the otlier hand, 
 is not opposed on principle to the continuance of the government in the banking 
 business, or to fiat money ; and its leaders have shown no disposition to assist in 
 the work of getting the treasury back upon a sound and legitimate basis. 
 
 4. The representatives of the silver mining interest in the Republican party 
 are more dangerous than the friends of free coinage in the Democratic party. 
 The former, supported by a large tinancial interest, purely selfish in its demands, 
 will be satisfied with no measure that does not enhance the price of their product. 
 The latter, representing agricultural communities where the need of more circu- 
 lating medium is felt, will be satisfied with a measure which opens the door, 
 under proper safeguards, for freer banking, with increased circulation of bank- 
 notes. 
 
 5. The sound money men in the Democratic party have shown over and over 
 again that they will not compromise with financial heresy ; and, except as a basis 
 from which to compromise, the proposition for the free coinage of silver at the 
 ratio of 16 to 1 by this country alone is so wildly impracticable that it is hardly 
 dangerous. The Republican leaders, on the other hand, judging by their past 
 record, will compromise the silver question whenever they can see a chance to 
 unite their party by doing so. This fact and their general protectionist inclina- 
 tions make the adoption by their party of some such proppsition as the free coin- 
 age of the American silver product a constant possibility and menace. 
 
 MAINTENANCE OF GOLD STANDARD. 
 
 While we have in this country a bimetallic currency, and shall doubtless con- 
 tinue to have it, we have not a bimetallic standard. Every sensible man knows 
 that the establishment of such a standard is only possible, if at all, by interna- 
 tional action ; and even the warmest friends of international bimetallism are 
 obliged to acknowledge that there are no present prospects of its adoption. The 
 hopes excited by the accession of the Conservatives to office in England and the 
 elevation of Mr. Balfour to the position of government leader of the House of 
 Commons are already seen to be baseless. 
 
 Gold is to-day the sole standard of value and the real money of redemption 
 in this country, and this may as well be recognized in plain language. The fun- 
 damental currency question is whether it shall remain so, or whether we shall 
 adopt the silver standard in its place, and settle all of our debts, public and pri- 
 vate, on a silver basis. There is no middle ground. 
 
The present position has arisen from the extraordinary decline in the market 
 value of silver, due to its greatly increased and cheapened production. Our silver 
 dollars have indeed an intrinsic value, but one much below their face value. The 
 difference is i-epresented by faith in their exchangeability into gold dollars. With 
 the existing volume of silver money, large as it is, this faith can easily be main- 
 tained by such wise and resolute management of the treasury as it has had under 
 Secretary Carlisle; and the increased demand for circulating medium arising 
 from the growth of the country will constantly make the task easier. The stop- 
 page of further purchases of silver was the crucial point. The unconditional re- 
 peal of the Sherman law, through the firm insistence of President Cleveland, 
 secured this first condition of safety. No renewal of such purchases can be un- 
 dertaken with safety for very many years to come, and any proposition looking 
 to that end should be resisted as strenuously as free coinage itself. 
 
 THE TARIFF. 
 
 Coming finally to the question of the tariff, what is there here of which the 
 Republicans can make a winning issue? The passage of the act of 1894 has left 
 them in a most embarrassing position, where they must choose between antagoniz- 
 ing the business interests of the country or abandoning their own economic prin- 
 ciples. 
 
 It rests entirely with them to say whether the agitation of the subject of the 
 tarifE which the country passed through during the seven years from 1887 to 1894 
 shall be renewed in the immediate future, or whether business, already so largely 
 restored to a prosperous condition, shall again be subjected to the doubt and un- 
 certainty which a threatened tariff revision inevitably brings with it. 
 
 During this period, dating from President Cleveland's tariff message in 
 December, 1887, to the enactment of the present tariff in August, 1891, we have 
 had two presidential elections, and one intervening Congressional election, in 
 which the tariff was by far the leading issue. We have had two tariff bills en- 
 acted, each after prolonged contests in Congress, during which business was dis- 
 turbed and enterprise checked. 
 
 It took four years to repeal the McKinley tariff, in spite of the fact that over- 
 whelming popular condemnation was pronounced upon it at the election of 1890, 
 within a few weeks of its enactment. At the same rate, it would take three years 
 from the present time to repeal the tariff' of 1894, With the greatest possible Re- 
 publican successes, it would be two years from next December before a Republi- 
 can Congress could be in session, with a Republican President in the White 
 House; and, if it took as long to enact a new Republican tariff measure as it did 
 to formulate and pass the McKinley bill, it would be October, 1898, before the 
 present law conld be changed. One question is, therefore, this : In order to 
 secure possible changes in the present tariff three years hence, do the business men 
 
9 
 
 of the country wish to .subject the present business situation, with the large meas- 
 ure of prosperity already restored, with the glowing promise of the next few years, 
 to the strain and unsettlement of an immediate roopeiiing of the tariff question? 
 
 If there is to be such a reopening, the Republican party must, in the nature 
 of the situation, be alone responsible for it. It may take two to make a fight, but 
 it only takes one to begin it. 
 
 The differences of opinion which prevailed in the Democratic party last year 
 in regard to the framing of the present tariff bill are only interesting as matters 
 of political history. They concern the past, not the present or the future. The 
 supreme test of a political party is not what it says, but what it does. The Dem- 
 ocratic party as a political organization is responsible for the tariff of 1894. It 
 can no more evade that responsibility than it can evade the responsibility for the 
 repeal of the federal elections law; and it has no disposition to do so. 
 
 It would not be honest to say that the act as passed fully satisfied the aspira- 
 tions of the Democratic masses or fully represented the views of the wisest Demo- 
 cratic statesmen ; but, so far as it went in the direction of lowering duties and 
 striking the shackles from commerce, it had the unanimous support of the whole 
 Democratic party. The act was in every respect, from a Democratic standpoint, 
 an improvement over the McKinley bill. 
 
 Thus the Democratic party now holds the position of conservator of the 
 industrial peace ; it occupies the conservative ground ; it defends the mainte- 
 nance of the present status. It has had its day in court, and its work is on trial 
 before the jury of public opinion. It is willing to leave it there. All it asks is 
 time for the formation of an intelligent opinion. Fact is better than argument: 
 experience is worth more than theory. The practical results of the present tariff 
 during the next few years will be vastly more enlightening than all the predic- 
 tions of what it is going to do that could be printed in all the Republican papers 
 of the country from now to the next presidential election. Once more it is a con- 
 dition, and not a theory, that confronts us. That condition is the wonderfully 
 quick return of prosperity, the revival of industry, the full employment of labor, 
 and the increase of wages under a Democratic tariff. We may well leave to 
 our Republican friends the task of making this condition of affairs harmonize 
 with their theories. 
 
 Unfortunately for the country, the Republican party upon the tariff question 
 seems hopelessly wedded to its idols. When the Wilson bill, coming from the 
 House, was put in its present form in the Senate, the Republican senators had one 
 of the best opportunities to get rid of a troublesome issue that was ever presented 
 to a political party. They could have taken the wind almost completely out of 
 the sails of their opponents by saying that, while they did not altogether like the 
 Senate bill, they would accept it as a compromise measure, and by so doing elimi- 
 nate the tariff issue from politics. Instead of having the breadth of view and 
 the foresight to improve this priceless opportunity, they continued to oppose the 
 bill, to denounce it as a free-trade measure, and to prophesy disaster from its 
 
10 
 
 passage. With their usual short-sighted fatuity, the Republican leaders missed 
 their opportunity then, and are again committing their party now to an immediate 
 reopening of the tariif question. Senator Sherman, one of the wisest and most 
 experienced of these, frankly favors the re-enactment of the McKinley bill " with 
 such changes as time may make necessary," and the reimposition of a high duty 
 upon wool. The leading party organs are insistent that the restoration of 
 McKinleyism shall be the issue, whether McKinley is the candidate or not. Even 
 those Republicans who are disposed to be the most cautious demand that the 
 present law shall be made "uniformly protective." 
 
 NO ONE-SIDED CONTEST. 
 
 Some leading Republican politicians, misled by the sweeping victory won 
 by their party at the election of a year ago, seem to assume that the restoration 
 of McKinleyism can be brought about without arousing a counter-demand for 
 the further reduction of duties below the figures of the present law. No mistake 
 could be greater. While the people generally are, I believe, ready to accept the 
 present tariff as a satisfactory compromise, and to sink the tariif question out of 
 sight for years to come, yet they will not permit a one-sided issue to be raised. 
 If an issue is raised at all, it cannot be merely between the maintenance of pres- 
 ent tariff rates and the restoration of McKmley duties. The present tariff can 
 be revised downward as well as upward; and, if the doorway of revision is to be 
 thrown open, the forces of tariff reform will again be let loose, and the whole 
 contest must be again fought out, with the advocates of reform standing upon 
 the vantage-ground of the present law. Therefore, let our Republican friends 
 dismiss the delusion that they can get up a contest in which friends of high pro- 
 tection have everything to gain and nothing to lose, and face the serious conse- 
 quences of their course. Let them be wise in time, and let well enough alone. 
 
 If any section of the country has been particularly well treated in the present 
 bill, and should therefore be the last to join in any effort to sweep it from the 
 statute book before it has even been fairly tried, it is New England. This has 
 not arisen, it is needless to say, from any political claims of our section upon the 
 Democratic party, but has been a necessary incident of the carrying out of the 
 economic policy of freeing from taxation the raw materials of industry. Except 
 a little lumber and stone, we produce next to nothing in the way of raw material. 
 AVhile the Democratic policy was not carried as far as it should have been in the 
 bill as passed, it nevertheless contained substantial and far-reaching steps in the 
 right direction, sufficient to confer a vast benefit upon the manufacturing in- 
 dustries of New England. 
 
 At the same time the rates of duty upon our leading manufactures, particu- 
 larly of cotton and wool, while reduced from prohibitory rates, were left high 
 enough to answer every reasonable requirement, even from the standpoint of pro- 
 
11 
 
 tection. It would be a sorry return for the consideratiou with which they have 
 been treated if the manufacturers of New England should turn away from those 
 who have so befriended them, and throw themselves into the arms of those who 
 would restore high taxes upon wool and the other raw materials of our great in- 
 dustries ; and they might find, in so doing, that the result would be to place them 
 at the time of the next tariff revision in the hands of radical free-traders. 
 
 THE REVENUES. 
 
 Republicans are fond of denouncing the present tariff for producing insutti- 
 cient revenue. The answer is twofold : first, that, while there has been, during 
 the last two years, equally under the MoKinley bill and the present tariff, an 
 insufficient revenue for the time being, owing to industrial depression, conditions 
 have so far changed that we have a surplus for the month of September; and it 
 is altogether likely, in the opinion of the best experts, that the shortage for the 
 present fiscal year will be a small one, if, indeed, there is any at all, and that 
 after this year there will be an ample revenue ; second, that the framera of the 
 act cannot fairly be blamed for the loss of revenue caused by the Supreme Court 
 annulment of the income tax provision of the law. Moreover, if it had not been 
 for the extraordinary and unforeseen decline in the price of raw sugar, the ad 
 valorevi duty upon that article would also have been larger by many millions of 
 dollars. So it cannot be charged against the framers of the present law that 
 they did not make reasonable calculations for insuring a sufficient revenue, 
 however unforeseen occurrences may have rendered it temporarily insufficient. 
 Furthermore, so far as the last fiscal year is concerned, it would hardly have been 
 sound policy to have framed a measure with a view to bringing in an adequate 
 revenue during a year of such extraordinary shrinkage in receipts and general 
 depression, as a measure so framed would have brought in too great a surplus 
 revenue upon the restoration of prosperity. 
 
 CIVIL SERVICE REFORM. 
 
 There remains the question of civil service reform, and here the Republican 
 party has everything to lose by a comparison between its record in office and that 
 of the Democratic administrations of President Cleveland. The public has come 
 to understand pretty clearly that the one supreme test of executive sympathy with 
 this reform and desire to promote it — a test in comparison with which individual 
 appointments and removals are of very slight significance — is the action taken to 
 extend the civil service system by bringing more offices within its scope. This is 
 the only thing that a President can do which insures the permanent advance of the 
 merit system, for every forward step is binding upon his successors. President 
 
12 
 
 Harrison, down to the time of his defeat in 1S92, had measured the extent of 
 his devotion to civil service reform by extending original classification to just 766 
 persons. President Cleveland, down to the 1st of June, had in his present term 
 extended original classification to over 6,000 persons; and since that time the 
 clerks in pension agencies and the employees in the government printing-office 
 have been added, increasing that number by several thousand. 
 
 Another step of great importance in the direction of establishing the merit 
 system in a branch of the public service that cannot be brought directly within 
 the scope of the civil service rules has just been taken by the President, upon the 
 recommendation of Secretary Olney. 
 
 Consulates of a certain class, including about three-quarters of the whole 
 number, are hereafter to be filled either by transfer or promotion within the ser- 
 vice, by restoration to the service of persons formerly connected with it, or by 
 non-competitive examinations of persons selected therefor by the President. The 
 executive order of President Cleveland establishing this new system, — while it 
 cannot, unfortunately, be made binding upon his successors, — carried out in the 
 spirit that it will be under this administration, will make an important beginning 
 in the separation of our consular service from politics, which the business organi- 
 zations of the country have justly been urging. In no branch of the public ser- 
 vice will the introduction of a new system of appointment result in as large a 
 pecuniary gain to the government through stopping the undervaluation of imports 
 at its source, and in no branch is such a change more important for sentimental 
 and patriotic reasons. 
 
 The measure now adopted, while it will doubtless fail to meet the expecta- 
 tions of some persons whose zeal for reform is in excess of their knowledge how 
 to secure it, and while it is already denounced by Republican partisans as a device 
 to keep Democrats in office, has the merit of being simple and practicable. If 
 only a first step, it is a sure and safe one, and will not have to be retraced. It 
 will give to this administration the great credit of having inaugurated the long- 
 called-for reformation of our consular service. 
 
 Having said this much, I wish to add a few words more in refutation of a 
 charge which has been given considerable currency, — the charge that this admin- 
 istration in its first six months '• debauched " the consular service by filling it 
 with men appointed without regard to fitness and on the lowest partisan con- 
 siderations. 
 
 Some persons have gone so far as to bring the further charge against Presi- 
 dent Cleveland that he surrendered his constitutional prerogative of appointing 
 consuls to an Assistant Secretary of State, and allowed him to originate and carry 
 out a policy of "looting " the service. 
 
 While this charge is hardly consistent with the known characteristics of the 
 President, some people may have been credulous enough to believe it. Let me 
 therefore say, as I am in a position to do, that President Cleveland has always 
 assumed the full responsibility both of the policy adopted and of the manner 
 
V] 
 
 in which it was carried out. Claiming nothing for myself beyond a painstaking^ 
 effort to assist him in the carrying out of his views and jturpoaes in regard to 
 this service, I repel the charge that this administration " debauched " the con- 
 sular service as unfounded in fact and inspired either by ignorance or malice. 
 
 Political considerations had as much, and no more, to do with the selection of 
 consuls by this administration as they have had under preceding administrations. 
 We found a service filled with men who had been appointed, a large number of 
 them under President Harrison, as a reward for political service or through politi- 
 cal influence, — some of them men who were sent to Europe for the sole purpose 
 of supplying high tariff arguments. We found a service containing some conspic- 
 uously good consuls, who have been retained, but in which not one-half of the 
 incumbents had suflicient claim to retention on their merits, and not a few of 
 whom were totally unfit. No real reform could be effected without a considerable 
 change of the /lersonnel ; and, as long as the service was on a political basis. Presi- 
 dent Cleveland properly preferred to appoint Democrats. In view of the fact that 
 as many Republican consuls have been left in office as there were Democratic con- 
 suls when this administration came in, I fail to see that any political injustice 
 has been done to the Republican party or any of its members. 
 
 In making the new appointments, an effort was made to distribute them as 
 fairly as possible among the different States, in accordance with the principle 
 adopted in the civil service law. That the appointments were, on the whole, as 
 good as could have been made under a strictly merit system, I should be the last 
 to contend. But I do claim with entire confidence that quite a number of them 
 could not have been improved upon under any system, and that the changes, as 
 a whole, materially improved the personnel of the service, both in character and 
 ability. 
 
 More than twenty former consuls were restored to the service upon the 
 strength of their official records. A larger proportion of men capable of speaking 
 the language of the countries to which they were sent, and a larger proportion of 
 young men, were appointed than ever before. I challenge any fair investigation 
 of the claim which I now make, after obtaining the fullest information in my 
 power, not only from the State Department but from other sources, that our consu- 
 lar reports have never been as intelligent or as valuable to the country as they now 
 are, and that we have never under Republican administrations had a body of 
 consuls who, upon the average, stood as well, with Americans coming in contact 
 with them abroad and with the people among whom they reside, as do those now 
 in office. 
 
 The new and better system will start with more consuls in office who are 
 worthy of continuance in the service upon their merits than there ever have been, 
 within our generation at least. Thus the administration can claim the credit, 
 first, of improving our consular representation, and, second, of establishing a sys- 
 tem that tends to make such improvement permanent. — 
 
 The Democracy of Massachusetts may well be proud of having furnished to 
 
14 
 
 this administration a man who, having filled the position of Attorney-general with 
 conspicuous ability and credit for two years, has been recently called by the Presi- 
 dent, with universal approval, to the first place in his cabinet. We may well 
 rejoice that it has been our privilege to make such a conspicuous contribution as 
 we have done in the person of Richard Olney to the success and efficiency of this 
 administration, and to show to the country that the old Commonwealth, whose 
 sons have borne so large a part in the federal government from the beginning, is 
 still producing men able to fill the highest executive offices at Washington. 
 
 LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT. 
 
 Passing to questions of State government, no State issue can be of greater 
 fundamental importance than that of the maintenance of the full rights of local 
 self-government, as opposed to State centralization. Here is a party issue that is 
 definite and distinct, an issue between irreconcilable political principles. 
 
 The Democratic party believes in the sacred American right of local control 
 of local affairs, at all times and in all places. It believes in this right, regardless 
 of any comparison between the results of local control or of State control in any 
 particular instance. It believes that it is no use to try to make the stream rise 
 higher than its source; that it is better to place upon every community the duty 
 of working out its own salvation than to save it even from the consequences of 
 the folly or indiffei-ence of its citizens, at the expense of teaching them to look to 
 the interposition of some outside power rather than to their own efforts. 
 
 It has been said that a wise and benevolent despotism is the best government; 
 but it will hardly be contended that it would be consistent with American politi- 
 cal ideas to prefer it to Democracy. Possibly, although we do not believe it, the 
 Commonwealth of Massachusetts can manage the local affairs of its cities and 
 towns better through State officials appointed by the governor than they are now 
 managed by the local officers chosen by the people ; but from the standpoint of 
 Democracy this question is entirely irrelevant. 
 
 When the Republican party took away from the people of Boston the control 
 and administration of their own police force, supported by local taxation, it com- 
 mitted itself to a vicious and dangerous policy. It invited any citizens of any 
 other city of the Commonwealth who were dissatisfied with their police force to 
 apply to the State to assume its management. The first extension of this policy 
 came last year, when the city of Fall River was alsa placed under State guardian- 
 ship. The results of State control in that city, if I am correctly informed, are 
 not such as to encourage its adoption elsewhere, unless from the standpoint of 
 Republican party advantage. This year the Republican legislature passed bills 
 placing the cities of Holyoke and Woburn under the same system ; and, though 
 the gubernatorial veto prevented for the moment these extensions of the State 
 police idea, yet the Republican party will carry it further if it has the power. 
 
15 
 
 The aiithority to grant liquor licenses, and to control Llie liquor traffic tlirough 
 the police force, is too attractive a political teinptdtion for that party to be able 
 to re>ist it. 
 
 The zealous representative of the system of State police control in the city of 
 Boston, General Martin, has had the clearness of vision to see just where Republi- 
 can legislation is carrying us and the courage to advocate the extension of the 
 policy to its logical conclusion. A State police force for all the cities of the Cora- 
 uion wealth, transferable from one point to another and controlled by the orders 
 of a single head, is his proposition ; and it has the merit of simplicity and com- 
 prelieusiveness. Those who favor it can vote the llepublicau ticket iu the couQ- 
 dence that it cannot fail in the long run to commend itself to that party. Then 
 let lis complete the work by giving to this police force the powers which it would 
 have iu Russia, and we shall be saved a great deal of the trouble and annoyance 
 which is caused by local control of the police power. 
 
 THE AMERICAN PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION. 
 
 Another question pertaining to State politics calls for brief mention. A year 
 ago we charged upon the Republican party — and the charge was well founded 
 at that time — a tacit alliance with A. P. A.-ism. The members of that organiza- 
 tion had been allowed to. dominate Republican caucuses and control Republican 
 nominations, and not a single Republican leader of prominence had openly repu- 
 diated and denounced its so-called principles. 
 
 Since that time the most eminent Republican of the State, Senator Hoar, has 
 publicly given his views of this organization and its purposes in language which, 
 for clearness and emphasis, left nothing to be desired. The present Republican 
 governor has also said and done enough to show that he has no sympathy with 
 A. P. A.-ism, and to draw down upon himself the antagonism of its advocates; and 
 a majority of his party have apparently supported him in this course. 
 
 As patriotic citizens of the Commonwealth, placing her good name, threatened 
 by this movement for the introduction of religious intolerance and racial antago- 
 nism into her politics, above all partisan interests, we would rejoice to see the party 
 now in control of the State shake off such a pernicious alliance. But it still re- 
 mains for the Republican Convention by its platform declaration either to com- 
 plete the work or to invite a renewal of the same contest next year. It would 
 not require the rhetorical resources of Senator Hoar to frame a plank which would 
 settle the question whether A. P. A.-ism is consistent with Republicanism in this 
 Commonwealth; but it will take something more than a vague generality to do it. 
 If it is not, there cannot be a better year than this to declare that fact, and put an 
 end to this agitation so far as the two great political parties are concerned. 
 
 If the Republican party, with a majority of 65,000 behind it at the last State 
 election, cannot muster up strength enough to face this issue directly and un- 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 16 013 788 962 6 ^ 
 
 equivocally this year, anil dispose of it once for all, it is wofully lacking botli in 
 courage and political sagacity. Not one-quarter of those who are affiliated with 
 this movement could .possibly be driven out of the Republican party by the most 
 radical declaration in opposition to their views ; and the Republican leaders well 
 know that these men would have no inclination, and that they would be the last 
 to receive an invitation, to act with the Democratic party, whose fundamental prin- 
 ciples are diametrically opposed to their ideas. A. P. A. -ism simply lives in this 
 State on its hope of controlling the Republican party. It will go to pieces if that 
 hope is taken away from it. The Republican Convention has an opportunity to 
 render a signal service to the cause of good politics in this Commonwealth. 
 
 REPUBLICAN PARTISANSHIP. 
 
 There is one fact that must not be overlooked when Governor Greenhalge 
 advances claims to receive non-partisan support. In the administration of his 
 office, so far as appointments to the salaried commissions, in which the actual 
 government of the State is so largely vested, are concerned, — and the making 
 of these appointments is perhaps the most important duty attaching to the 
 gubernatorial office, — he has deliberately ostracized the Democratic party, and 
 denied it even fair minority representation. Whether he has adopted this 
 policy of partisan proscription because it conforms with his personal views of 
 political propriety, or because the appetite of the Republican party for office, 
 after its partial exclusion under Governor Russell, had become so ravenous that 
 nothing could stand against it, we need not inquire. The fact remains that the 
 more than fair consideration which Governor Russell gave to individual Republi- 
 cans whom he found in office, and to the claims of that party for representation 
 on commissions, have been requited by Governor Greenhalge by this unworthy 
 policy of partisan proscription. 
 
 Fellow-Democrats, let us enter the coming contest with renewed confidence 
 in the principles of our party and in their continued triumph. Misrepresentation, 
 prejudice, and disappointment have had their day. The people are once more 
 ready to listen to argument and to be guided by reason. Proud of the record of 
 our national administration and of the great legislative accomplishments of a 
 Democratic Congress, let us go before them with aggressive confidence, based 
 upon the firm faith that in the long run they can always be trusted to see the 
 right and to support it. 
 
 Issued hfj the Young Men's Democratic Club of Massachusetts, 
 12 Bosworth Street, Boston, October, 1895. 
 
 \