National Republican., 1888-05-09
THE HORSE.


luton Of inquiry as to the case Of O'Don-
nell. under sentence uf death " Great
Britain.
Mr. Bryce stated that he had denied the
correctness Of the statement, aud I'm Viudi-
cation Of his denial he had read u telegram
from Mayor Hewitt Cncrgctically denying
that he had ever apuloglzcdh to the British
minister, and u letter IN which he details the
circumstances Ot the case.
Mr. Bryce also sent to the clerks desk
and had read statement made by Minister
West in 1854 denying that Mr. Hewitt had
apOlogizcd tU him for his paIL in The trans
action.
The documents, Mr.. Bryce said, were
sufficient 10 disprOyc the charges which had
hccn brought against q relation Of his by
malriagc and an honorable gentleman.
Mr. WOodburn, of Nevada. said that he
had never In his life knowingly made II
charge that he could not s,iUstamtiatc. lie
did not regard the denial made by
the British minister as denial of
the charge lit fact, II was an admis.
sion. 1t was no better authority than
the gentlcmans Mr.. Bryce statement that
he was relative by marriage TO \. = llcw.
lit. When he (Mr WOOdhurnl made this
charge he was Informed by u reputable gen
tlCman in Washington, who was on the
floor at the time, that he was one of the
committee of three representative lrishmtn
delegated 10y an Irish organization of
America 10 investigate the truth Of the
charge made against Mr. Hewitt. That gen
ilcnan stated to him, and said he could
prove it, that the result of that invrsliga-
ton was that \. ;, Hewitt was guilty of the
charge. One Of the committee was the cor
respondent Of the New York Irish IIuR,
aud another was Mr.. O'Nlcaghcr Condor,
and upon their statements in addition TO
the current literature Of the day, he made
,lt Il 4 II. l..
needed better authority than the letter Over
the signature of \. ). Hewitt, the Interested
party--thc defendant In the case.
MI. BTrmn, of Pennsylvania, said that
Mr.. Bryce would bear him out in the state
mcht that after the controversy It few days
ago they had looked over the RccDrh to-
gethcr, and that he (Nlr. Brimm) had then
and there agreed that the gentleman might
either not publish anything in the Record,
with reference 10 II, or that he might strike
out the word apology aud insert the word
"cXplanatiuu,' or that he might llS il ip IN
| any way TO suit himself, consistent with the
truth. The gentleman had fixed up the
Rccyyd. The Record was not as it should
he, hut he had no objection to the manner
In which the gentleman had seen fit to liv
II mp. But when the charge was made
that no explanation was made by Mr.. llcw.
1T he still maintained that that charg,
was false, or at least not correct. His rec.
election was that Mr.. Hewitt had made the
explanation on the floor, but. whether it
was made ON the floor Or not, the
explanation the midcst term that
he could use) was made by
Mr.. Hewitt before the committee ON foreign
affairs Mr Hewitt appeared before the
committee Rnd made u statement, but IL
was not made IN the presence of anybody
interested on the other side. lie submitted
that that was an explanation, If not an apol-
o"y. 1t was enough 10 convince the CON
mittcr that II ought 10 accommodate Mr..
Hewitt by going no further into the matter
The subject was then dropped, and the
House went into committee of the whole
(Mr Springer, of Illinois, in the chair) on
the tariir bill.
>Mr. Stockdale, of Mississippi. took the
floor in continuation OF his speech in favor
of the bill, which was interrupted by the
adjournment last Saturday.
Mr.. Hopkins, of Illinois, opposed the bill
He quoted Henry Clay as saying that the
most disastrous period he had ever wit
messed was the seven years following the
tariff Of 1924. This. said Mr.. Hopkins, was
tire period when the Millses and Carlislcs
and Breckinrdgcs Of that day had obtained
control Of our national affairs and engraftcd
upon Cur laws their free trade here,ieS.
The fact could not he kept from the people
IN the coming campaign that the Demo.
cratic party stood committed uncquivoraIly
and irrcvOcably to the doctrine of free
trade. That party had come into power By
practicing system Of false prctenses upon
the American people unparalleled in the his.
tory OF political parties. Did the party send
Mr. Carlisle to New York before the las
election To explain the tariff plank uf the
Chicago platforms Did il send Mr., Hemp.
bill there to talk to the lahorers as he had
talked during the debate on the ilOorg No,
the managers of the Democratic party
knew that New York could never be
carried In that way. When the
columns We're shaken and defeat seemed IN.
cvitabIc, they turned to the brainicst and
samuel }. Randall, aud lie went TO New
York to explain 10 the voters there that the
manufacturing interests Of the country
would not he disturbed in the event OF the
success Of the Democratic party, ana that
the tarifl plank in the Chicago platform
meant only wise aud iudiciOus rcarrangc-
mcnt of the inequalities which all parties
held to exist In the tariff to a greater or
less extent and to require treatment. Ii had
been Mr. Randall's boast that his efforts
had made II possible for Mr., Cleveland to
occupy the presidential chair. How had the
Democratic party repaid his efforts and how
had his pledges been redeemed 10y that party
If rumor was correct, Mr. Randall was no
longer visitor at the white house: his com
n,
party. His influence had been curtailcd by
raising mp n rival whose control Of federal
patronage had been used 10 humiiatc and
disgrace the once lOnOrcd leader of the
Democratic party.
In conclusion he entered his solemn p"O-
test against this attempt to overthrow the
great business industries Of America.
Mr. Mansur, of Missouri, delivered an cX-
haustiyc speech IN support of the bill, and
he contcnlcd that the internal revenue sys-
ton should he maintained for the payment
Of pensions and The remainder Of the war
debt. lie quoted numerous statistics IN
substantiatiOn of his assertion that the pco.
pie were more prosperous under low than
under high tariff.
Mr.. j. D. Taylor, of Ohio, denounced the
free trade as fragment of the rebellion and
as being as dangerous to the country in 1883
as secession had been in 1851,
MIR, TaylOr's remarks will he found else
where in this paper,l
Mr. Richardson, of Tennessee, supported
the bill, and referred to the antagonism Of
the Republicans to every effort which the
Democratic party had made to fulfill It's
pledges of taTill reduction. The bin now
presented for consideration was wise and
conservative measure, which, while II would
not break down the protective system
would grant some measure Of relief to the
overburdened people. The present tariff
was an anomaly. II fed tile patient aud yet
blcd him. ltwas wine to DE taken forthc
stomach, ,s sake, and yet powerful narcotic.
1t brought solid comfort To the worker in
the shops, and yet led to strikes ana lock-
outs. 1t contracted aud expanded under
the same influences andCOnditOns. IL gave
the man who made goods higher prices, and
yet gave the man who bought them cheaper
goods, There was no such pnnacca, nothing
like II on the face Of the earth or in The
4 . No..
which violated every law of nature.
Mr., McAdoo, Of New Jersey. said that
his convictions We're never changed by in
terest or Clam0r but by facts and reasons,
He spoke as Democrat His first vote had
been given for Democratic candidates on 4