We may be dull of perception
and beyond the vivifying light
so freely shed for our infor
mation, but we remain of the
opinjon that just in propor
tion as any given work is se
rious and complicated, and de
pendent for its successful con
summation upon time and care
and thought, just so should its
inauguration be hastened, and
delay be avoided by those who
are responsible. That a recon
struction of the tariff laws upon
the lines clearly indicated by the
popular verdict at die polls will
involve enormous labor, and call
for the largest exercise of states
manship we do not doubt. On
the contrary, we believe that we
realize the fact as vividly as does
any one of the advocates of pro
crastination. But it has not yet
been explained to our satisfac
tion that a performance of ex
treme urgency should be neg
lected, or that a work requiring
the utmost deliberation will be
promoted by postponement. In
a word, we can see no good pur
pose that is likely to be gained by
delay. If the Democratic lead
ers propose to effect the reforms,
for the accomplishment of which
they haye been commissioned by
the people, why not set about it
prompdy? If the work be com
plex, laborious, delicate, calling
for the exercise of special ad
dress and intellect and investi
gation, is'there iiot every reason
why it should be begun as soon
as possible?
There maybe some fine points,
invisible to the uninspired spec
tator, in this extraordinary con
troversy, but, as we see, it, the
postponement of tariff reform to
the regular fession of December,
1893 is simply the wasteful sac-1 sometime before election. Roa
rifice of a year. The question nokeNews.
