St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-07-21
TARIFF TAX TABLETS.

The Pittsburg Post says: Secretary
Biaine's letter opposing the repeal
of the sugar cduties is another
of the premier's deft ways of knitting
the Mckinley bill under the fifth rib.
1t is to be remembered that what Mr..
Blaine says as to reciprocity applies
to wool as we'll as sugar, and. carried
out, will give free wool, ores, hides and
other South American products. TO
see Blaine climbing on Grover Cleve7.
lands platform is a grand feat III pollt-
zeal gymnastics"
The Philadelphia Times looks at it
in this light: Premier Blaine has
pricked the farmer bubble of the Nc
Kinley tariff bill, and it is now utterly
collapsed.
He declares the plain truth when he
says that the new tariff bill won't open
a market for another bushel of wheat
OF another barrel of pork and he shows
that under our restrictive tax policy
our foreign market for breadStutfS
grows narrower
''Mr. Blaine is not a Democrat; he is
not free trader; he does not even con-
fess to love for tariff reform; but he
does see the fearful precipice on which
our own already Overtaxed consumers,
and closing markets against our own
products.
''There were few farmers so deficient
in intelligence as to need Mr.. Blaine'S
thunderbolt against the injustice OF the
Mckinley bill to farmers; but now that
he has pricked the farmer bubble, will
the party leaders persist in passing the
measure with Mr.. Blaine's indelible
stamp of fraud upon it?''
The Philadelphia Record says: 'sln
his letter to Senator Frye, Secretary
Blaine makes the solemn declaration
that there is not section or a line in
the entire (McKinley tariff bill that
would open market for another buShei
of wheat OF another barrel of pork
What increases the sinister import of
this declaration is the fact that the au-
thors and supporters of the bill propose
to eXpend millions of public money in
in the vain attempt to WOO back com
merce which the adoption of their bill
would drive away"
The West and the East seem to be
impressed alike with the iniouity of the
Mckinley bill and with the business OF
Mr.. Blaine's criticism on the Infamous
| measure. The st. Louis Republic says !:
Undoubtedly this is the strongest
attack that could have been made on
Mr.. Mckinley from Republican stand
| point. Mr.. Blaine appeals indirectly to
the large class of Republicans who be-
lieve that free sugar will mean low
tariff all along the line. Aside from
this, he has IN his favor. and against
MIR. Mckinley, the great increase in ex-
| penditures under this administration.
| which threatens a deficit so seriously
that the Republicans are already Begin
ming to tack on to other legislation
''riders" for covering into the gen
eral fund of the treasury the
| funds which have been set aside
for special purposes. The feeling is
| becoming more general among Repub-
icans that they will be obliged to keep
| the sugar tax or else run short of money
! for pensions and the other appropria-
lions they are making so lavishly. The
| president is evidently moved by this
| feeling into assent to Mr.. Blaine'S oppo-
sition to Mr.. Mckinley. The present
prospect is that the maker Of the Chi
| cago tariff platform will be discredited
as leader and forced to the rear under
| the pressure of Mr.. Blaine'S superior
tact and experience. The sentence
! quoted above from the letter to Senator
| Frye shows that MIR. Blame means to
! beat the bill if he can, unless the sugar
| clause is stricken out. AS this clause is
the only one in the bill which makes any
| reduction worthy of mention, the stua-
| ton is very embarrassing for Mr.. Nc
| Kinley."