Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-05-19

l
dustries by the protective tariff, ana rea,
from Jefferson, Monroe, Madison an,
other Democratic foreisthers, to prov
that protection was a fundamental Demo
cratic principle. Mr.. Randall sait
| he yielded to the men o,
his side of the House the desire O
continued Democratic control Of the ed
ADMINISTRATION Of the federal government
he did not believe the adoption Of commit
tees bill would make such result certain
and added 81 cannot be coerced into eny
particular action upon an economic ques
ton by the direction Of party caucus
The period Of political Caucus has de-
partedInever TO return snd yet would con
fer and have unity II possible" In these
matters he spoke for himself. "My CON
victions on the tariff are strone
and founded, 1 think, on principle and OF
information and comprehension of the
subject. When any one hereafter takes
up the task OF invoking caucus power, OF
other modes OF coercion, can only say te
him, II he acts with good purpose, ihs'
1t will prove fruitless undertaking; OF
il with Ill metive, then assign to hin
the natural result which such self-consti-
tu.ed proceedings Deserve" he closed
1
principles of protection, and asked
that they be maintained and maintained
through the efforts of the party that in
stituted them. He could not conceive
that the ideas and principles that went
down in 1851 would ever again FREEDOM
mate in this country.
Messrs. Forsn [Democrat) Of Ohio,
Wise (Democrat) of Vhg mia, and Kelly
(Repuolicap) Of Pennsylvania were the
first to extend congratulations to Mr..
Randall at the conclusion of his speech.
Mr.. Mckinley opened his speech
with defamation that the coun-
try was in an analogous situation.
While we were seeking to fnd
objects to relieve from tariff taxation,
and other nations were engaged 10 other
fields Of human enterprise and human
protection to find new objects of taxation,
all were agreed that taxation should be
reduced, the only contention being rs to
the manner of that reduction. He sharp
~ contrasted the "tarifi -for-revenue'
policy of the Democrats and the "tari1.
for-protection" policy of the Republicans.
He maintained that one meant free
admission to this country OF
foreign goods which could be produced
here whenever the line of excessive reve-
hue was reached and consequently the
destruction of American Industries. The
other mesnt protection IS well as reve-
nue.. 1t means admission to our indus
tries and protection to our labor and the
fruits Of it's work. There were several
illustrations Of the Democratic doctrine
in the bill. Wool was one of them. Cotton
bsgging was another. The bill meant
that Calcutta and Dundee should supply
us with cotton bagging and the countries
Of the east with wool. The Democrats
had been letting our own people take
care of themselves and trying to legislate
for other and foreign people. In the
course OF his speech Mr.. Mckinley en-
tered into vigorous criticism of the bill
and created much amusement and ap-
plause by his analysis OF the incongruities
of the measure. He said that owing to
lack of time he could not
point out all of the inequalities
OF pill, but picked out few samples by
which he said the bill could be judged.
He showed that the duty on steel billets
had been increased from 40 per cent to 63
per cent. ad valorem, thereby causing an
increase OF to cent for every pound OF
wire fencing that enclosed the farms OF
the west. The duty on cut nails made
from steel billets was reduced % per cent.
while the duty on the raw materials
was increased 45 per cent. He declared
that the bill was sectional, in that the
cotton planter could not get hoop iron
| for his cotton ties free of duty, while the
farmer Of the west must pay for the same
| iron IA cents per pound If he wished 1t to
bind his thatch or his pail.
Mr.. Mckinley completed at
2:40 O'Clock what was con-
sidered the best protectionlst speech OF
the debate, and he was enthusiastically
applaaded and congratulated oy his col
leagues. He was followed by Mr.. Brock
enridge OF Kentucky, who was warmly
received.
Mr.. Breckinridge Of Kentucky made an
elaborate speech in favor of the bill, SET
ting forth all the strong arguments of
the Democrats in support Of the question
In logical and eloquent manner, and hold
ing the attention of both those who favor
and those who oppose the bill. His ref
erence to Mr.. Morrison was greeted with
the most tumultuons applause on the
Democratic side. Hands and arms were
wildly waved and books were tossed into
the air. Turning towards Mr.. Randall's
seat he expressed his high appreciation of
Mr.. Randall's past service and Of his
present ability, but added that it had
panied him to hear that gentleman close
his speech by reference to slavery. II
contrasted with the manly open
ing of the gentleman from
Ohio (McKinley) when he
put the past behind him and looked to the
present and future. The applause which
had been literally interpreted through
out Mr.. Breckinridge's speech grew into q
storm when thst gentleman took his seat
Cheer followed cheer. Ladies in the gal
leries waved their hsndkerchiefs and Mr..
Breckinridge's colleagues rushed forward
enthusiastically to grasp his hand.
The committee then rose and the House
took recess till p. m.
At the evening session thirty five pens
sion bills were passed.
Adjourned.
Anew Society Fad.
Norristown Herald.
A new "society fad" is called Q pig
81