The record-union., 1891-10-17
M'KINLEY TARIFF LAW.
BLAINE DEFINES HIS POSITION ON
THE QUESTION.
He Has Cordially Supported Tt Ever
Since the Reciprocity Clause
Was Inserted.
Special to the REcoRD-UN1oN.


NEW YORK, Oct. 16.-An Ohio editor
having written to Mr.. Blaine that the
Democratic papers were parading him as
an opponent of the Mckinley bill, he re-
piled as follows:
AUGUSTA (Me.), Oct. IA, 1891.
"John Hotey,. Esq, Editor Journal,
IBucyTUS, ObtO-MY DEAR SIR: You in
form me that the Democratic papers in
your town, and many Democratic papers
throughout Ohio keep the following para
graph standing in type: But there is not
a section or line in the Mckinley bill
that will open the market for another
busheI of wheat or another barrel of
pork.-James q. Blaine to Senator Frye.
July IL, lS90.' This sentence is garbled.
and taken from its proper connection. 1t
creates wrong impression. What / did
say is the following: i do not doubt that
In many respects the tariff bill pending
In the Senate is just measure, and that
most of its provisions are in accordance
with wise policy of protection, but there
is not a section or line in the entire bill
that will open a market for another
busheI OF wheat or another pound of
pork
1.-THE letter in which this paragraph
occurs was written to Senator Frye July
IL, 1890, and the Mckinley bill did not
become law until October, nearly three
months thereafter. In my letter to SEN
ator Frye l objected to the bill because it
did not contain a reciprocity clause
which would provide a market for wheat,
pork and for other products of the farm
and for various fabrics. Before the bill
was finally passed a reciprocity clause
was inserted, and large addition was
made TO the free list. 1t will, therefore,
be seen from what / said in my letter
that the objection which l made to the
Mckinley bill was entirely removed be-
fore the bill became a law.
Let me further say that the reciprocity
clause has given ample market for many
barrels of flour and many pounds Of
pork. Brazil some months since entered
into treaty by which many American
articles were admitted free. Flour is
made free and pork admitted at nomi-
nal duty. Cuba and Porto Rico
have already reduced the duty on
flour from So so per barrel to 81
(which gives us the market), besides put
ting nearly 100 articles of American pro
duction on the free list. San Domingo
has made reciprocity treaty with flour
and pork on the free list, besides a largo
number of articles. Other treaties for
reciprocity are in progress. Germany,
without negotiating a formal treaty, has
removed the prohibition on pork, and
our Government, in consideration there
OF, has left her sugar on the free list. This
opens to us an entire new market, and
from S15, ,000,0 GOO to $40, 100000 of American
pork will be consumed per annum where
not pound has been taken for ten years
The reciprocity provision is proving
very successful, especially in farm pro-
ducts, and more particularly in the case
of the two articles mentioned In the par
agraph quoted-hour and pork. / am
not, therefore. an opponent of the Nc
Kinley bill, as the Democratic papers in
Ohio are constantly alleging. On the
contrary, | have cordially supported it
ever since it was perfected by the inser-
spectfully yours, JAMES G. BLAINE"