Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-08-23
Caugh. Mapping.

Mr.. DNdnRY, OF Maine, in speech
in the House Of Representatives last
Monday undertook to defend the record
Of the Republican party on the Chinese
question. Very much to his surprise,
no doubt, Mr.. McMnI1s. of Tennessee,
assailcd Mr.. DISoLEY's own record. We
quote:
Mir. McMILLIN Much as il will
ostound the House. when the question
was up Disqualification 10 restrict Chi
nese immigration in the past, the gen
tlenan from Maine on more than one
occasion held the ground that 1t was
wrong to do 20 and improper TO keep
out the Monaghan race, and voted 10 nj
low them TO come in. Applause on the
Democratic side.
Mr.. DlNGLEY: The gentleman is
mistaken.
Mr.. McMILLIN: What does the Gen-
tleman say
Mr.. DfNGbEY That the gentleman
from Maine said nothing Of the kind.
Mr.. McMILLlN The gentleman was
not paying attention to me. 1 did not
say he "said it. l said he held and
voted it. 1t was his own act, and it has
even more force than the mere saying 1t.
Mr.. DINGLEY: / declined to vote
for a bill that believed WAS IN contra
vention OF an existing treaty.
Dir. McMiLLIN All my friend says
it contravened the treaty. Let me state
his predicament for him Whenever you
hold that where there is treaty once
established which can never be broken
except with the consent Of both the par
ties making it you make it everlasting If
it is to the interest of your opposing
Power to keep 1t in force. And state
Of facts might arise where the Govern
meat could never escape from treaty.
In commenting upon our article Of
last week rs TO what advertisements pa
pers secular or religious, ought to pub
lish the Ccntra{ Presbyterian speaks a
good word for quack or patent medi-
cines. Richmond Dispatch.
If the Dispatch had stated that the
central Prcsbyteri0n, in the article re-
ferred to, bad. without undertaking to
decide the question, said that some OF
the so called quack or patent medicines
"sre esteemed by many Gncluding some
physicians OF highest repute) to beamong
the most valuable medicines" tour exact
language) it would have done something
like justice TO our remarks.
Full justice, however, would have re-
quired the further statement that the
real and avowed purpose Of the article
in the Ctatrdl WAS to condemn "the
very repreheDsible practice go common
both in religious ana secular papers OF
publishing advertisements III the midst
Of their selected reading matter, without
any mark to distinguish them from
other reading matter In the paper"
We had hoped, as it referred to our
article, that the Dispatch would give its
opinion also on this branch Of the sub
iect, which is now eliciting a great deal
Of discussion in the press Of the North
CoHtrat Presbyterian.
You now have "full justice" neigh
Dor, and we reply to your question that
we are decidedly of the opinion that adj
vertisements ought not to be thus in-
serted in any paper. Nevertheless, as
"some physicians Of highest repute
class some quack medicines "amongst
the most valuable Of medicines" and
thus afford our neighbor reason for
advertising medicines not thus endorsed,
We may be excused for saying that it
does no harm to "insert in the midst
Of selected reading matter advertise
ments which at glance everybody
knows to be advertisements We in
stance advertisements OF cigars, dry
goods. public meetings, and numerous
others. "Let Ms have peace.