Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1889-09-26
8EATTY'S BOMB! !.
Fired Into FOraker's
Xenia FrOth!
F0rakerismS and Little
BreeCheS' Shams,
Stripped Naked and Exposed
to the Peoples Gaze.
The Debt Reduced More in Two Years
Under HOadly Than in Three
Under Foraker.
Foraker Pretends He Refunded
the Debt and Reduced the
Interest,
Yet the Democratic Legislature
Provided for This During
80 Hoadly's Term.
Foraker Claims the Tax Levy
Has Been Reduced, But This
is Simply a Failure to
Collect For the Sink
ing Fund.
fhe Prince Of Humbugs Maintains His
Reputation
vast Sums Received From The
DOW Law Have been Squan.
dered and UnaccOunt.
ed For.
The Prince Of Humbugs Maintains His
Reputation.
vast sums Received From The
DOW Law Have been squan-
dered and UnaccOunt.
ed For.
TO THE PEOPLE OF OHIO.


The Governors Xenia speech fills FIVE
closely printed oluihns Of heCommefcial
H&SStte. 1t Gould, Without the loss Of
A&3dea, have been condensed into two.
MSS as destitute Of argument as Capell&
MSf political honesty, and comes neafef
Me drivel of i8Secility than ks
strength and dignity OF statesmahshlb.
Nleteland, OF course, gets his Usual
thrust. If Mrs. Cleveland had had even
sfemote conception of the direful con
&eduences of her "snub" she would, out
of compassion for an over-bored but
honest public, withheld it, and instead
Won the Governors gratitude by patting
him on the back and telling him he was
b :'bully'' boy. I am sorry she did not,
tor then his speeches would have been
shorter, probably more to the point, and
possibly more truthful.
7 After disposing of Cleveland the Gov
ernor proceeds to tell his audience that
pampbell, his opponent, is Republican.
tf this is true why should Republicans
not support him? 1t may be said that
hs was nominated by gang" but he
Gould not have been nominated by a
Worse lot Of scabs than the Cox-Capeller
$Ha Kurtz gang. If we must take Re.
@blican from the hands of gang, why
46t take Campbell2 In doing so we
Should vote for one who made an open,
manly fight for his nomination; for one
Who did not deceive his rivals by false
Assurances of friendship and support;
aid by his election we would not estab.
ltsh a third-term precedent and thus
pave the way for the Inauguration Of a
pernanent boss. With Republican
Qaihpbell in the executive office, Re-
publican Lieutenant-Governor, Treas
4fer, Attorney-General, etc., in their
fespective places and a Republican Gen.
sfal Assembly to back them, who dare
say that the State would not be in Most
Excellent hapds? Nobody. Let us,
therefore, give the Governor credit for
one Sensible suggestion.
Ibelieve in the doctrine of protection
to American industries; but I believe
also in the doctrine of common sense,
ana don't propose to pay premium o.
FOOLS by electing them to the guberna-
tQrial Office. Now, what actual or imag-
iaary connection could the 'longshore-
mems strike in London have with
the tariff question in the United
States? Why did the Governor re-
fer to it and dwell upon it at
length? Did he mean to have his
audience infer that strikes were uf-
known in this country and only known
ii Europe? Did he mean to have his
hearers infer that the higher wages paid
to freight handlers in this country were
due to the protection afforded by our
tariff law? If so, he sought to have
them infer falsehood. Freight handlers
here, or elsewhere, are not protected.
Their business is to handle barrels, box
es and crates, not to make them and not
to manufacture the merchandise with
Which they are filed. There is no duty
on 'longshoremen;" our ports are open
to them. They may come to this coun-
try by the million, and by doubling the
number reduce to one-half the present
wages of the laborer. In short the
wages of longshoremen are less in Eng
land than here simply because that
country is more populous than this; be-
cause workingmen in this line are more
abundant there than here. 1t is but
few years since there was strike among
freight handlers in New York, which
paralyzed the railroads and threatened
The city with famine. If strike in
London is an argument in favor of a pro-
tective tariff why should not strike in
New York be an argument against itP
What nonsense, therefore, to lug such
irrelevant matter into the discussion Of
THE great question of industrial protec.
ti6n. Who but thoughtless blunderel
Would do it?
Governor Foraker tell US:
ll1n my last annual message I pointed