The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1891-10-17
A BLAINE LETTER
The Secretary Defines His Posi-
ton on the Mckinley Bill.
HE HEARTILY ENDORSES 1T
He Explains His Note to Frye-Porter on the
Eleventh Census-AmOunt of Farm
and Home Indebtedness.

New YORK, Oct. 16.-An Ohio editor
papers were parading him as an opponent
OF the Mckinley bill, he replies as follows:
AUGUSTA. Me- Oct. Ia, 81.
John Hopley Esq, Editor of the journal. Bu-
cryuS, Ohio,
My DEAR SIR-You inform me the Demo-
cratic papers in your town, and many Demo-
cratic papers throughout ohio, keep the follow
ing paragraph standing in type: But there is
not q section or line in the Mckinley bill that
viii open the market for another bushel of
wheat or another barrel OF pork-James G..
Blaine to Senator Frye, July IL 80"
rms sentence is gGrbled, and taken from its
proper connection, it creates a wrong impress
sion. What did say is the following: L do
not douot that in many respects the tariff bill
pending in the Senate is a Just measure and
I that most OF its provisions are in accordance
with tle wise policy of protection, but there is
not section or line IN the entire bill that will
open the market for another busheI of wheat
( or another pound of pork
The letter in which this paragraph occurs was
written to Senator Frye July II, 1920 and the
Mckinley bill did not become a law until Ooto-
per ], nearly three months thereafter In my
letter TO Senator Frye 1 objected to the bill be
: cause 1t did not contain a reciprocity clause,
I which would provide a market for wheat pork
/ for other products of the farm and for various
| faDr1cS. Before the bill was finally passed a
reciprocity clause was inserted and a larye Rd-
Gltlon was made to the free list. 1t will there
] lore, DC seen from what Seldln my letter. that
/ the objection which l made to the Mckinley
/ bill was entirely removed before the bill be-
came a law.
! Let me further say. the reciprocity clause
has given an ample market for many barrels Of
! -four and many pounds of pork Brazil some
months since entered into treaty by which
many American articles are admitted free.
| Flour is made free and pork admitted at
nominal duty. Cuba and Porto Rico
have reduced the duty on -four from
$3.50 barrel to 81 (Which gives
US the markst), besides putting nearly
q hundred articles OF American production on
I the free list. San Domingo has made q reciprO-
| city treaty with flour and pork on the free List,
/ besides large number OF articles. Other
| treaties for reciprocity are in progress. Ger
many, without negota ing formal treaty, has
! removed the prohibition on pork and our gov
eminent, in consideration thereof, has left her
! sugar on the free list. This opens to us an en-
tirely new market and $3.50 C,OOO to SO GEO. COO
worth of American pork will be consumed per
| annum where not pound has been taken for
/ ten years.
! The reciprocity provision is proving very sue
| ceSsful especially in farm products, and more
particularly In the case OF two articles men,
| toned in the paragraph quoted-fiour and pork
I l am not, therefore, an opponent Of the McKin-
! Lev bill as the Democratic papers in Ohio are
constantly alleging. On the contrary, l have
I cordially supported it ever since IL was per-
fected by the insertion OF the reciprocity clause
| Very respectfully yours,
JAMES G. BLAINE