The times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1882-1897, 1888-09-14
THE MILLS BILL.
Dishonest Statements That 1t Does Not
Mean Free Trade Refuted.

Mean Free Trade Refuted.
Congressman Mills. who Is now pretty
we'll known rs the reputcd author of the
Mills bill, in his campaign speech In West
Virginia the other night used the fippant
and ridiculous statement that the average
reduction Of duty made by his bill is less
than per cent, and he wants to know IL
that is FREQ trade. AS Mr.. Mills is to re-
main OH the stump he will probably con-
tinue to employ this method of deceiving
those who are willing to be deceived by
the absurdity. The free trade organs
have tried in the same way to mako peo-
pie believe that the Mills bill is not what
it is. The public is thus assured that an
average reduction Of less than per cent.
cannot be free trade.
Well. If tho kind Of reduction III
duties provided for in the Mills bill did
not substantially mean FREQ trade, it is
very certain we should not see the free
traders so enthusiastically supporting the
measure as they are now doing. They all
understand perfectly well, just as Mills,
Carlisle. Watterson and tho Breckinridges
understand, that it means free trade, and
that any attempt to mako it appear to be
anything else Is an attempt to allay the
alarm which their work has caused, and
to entice the people into giving them an
other four years of power. That would
be construed as an Endorsement of their
present policy, which they have repeat
cdly claimed as only beginning. 1t
would be accepted by them as authority
to carry their assault upon the principle
of protection still further.
To accomplish this they seek to dc.
ceivo the people. To say that the Mills
bill provides for an average reduction of
less than per cent. is dishonest and mis-
leading, and every one who uses such a
statement knows it to be. There are q
number OF articles not touched by the
bill. It's supporters were compelled to
yield TO members ,on the Demo
cratic side in this particular and leave
some duties unchanged in order to get
votes for the measure. But there are
nearly 100 articles on which the reduc-
ton is 100 per cent, in other words have
been put on the free list. There are
large number of others reduced from 80
to so per cent; still larger number re
duced from so to so per cent, while the
reduction on many more ranges from II
to 30 per cent. This is naturally what
the free traders call a good beginning in
the direction of free trade 1t JUST.
iies their claim.
No free trader is bothering and fooling
himself about an average reduction of
less than per cent, although willing
the people should be deceived by that
kind of talk if they can be. If the bill
was really what the average reduction
claim is dishonesty intended toimply tho
free traders would not be so well pleased
with it as they are. 1t would not suit
Mr.. Mills himself, nor any of his Demo
cratic associates on the ways and means
committee. They have had to yield some
of their original ground in order to get
the votes of Democratic members from
northern and even southern districts, but
they have not yielded their purpose.
That is free trade, and this measure, as
they have proclaimed it, is but an enter
ing wedgc.-Philadelp Press.