The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1891-12-17
at that session, was the Mills bill, .

at that session, was the Mills bill. ana
he voted for that, not because he an
proved Of it, but because it was tia
only way in. which he could, by vote
express his sentiments in favor Of tart q
reduction, and because it was the onlv
way in which a tariff bill could reach
the senate, where he knew that anv
errors or mistakes in it would be cor
rected. That was his explanation in
his Minneapolis speech last fall
Neither is it true that Mr.. Nelson I'm.
qualiiedly and in all things endorsed
the Mckinley bill. Here is what he
said in that speech at Minneapolis:
Well, now, what about the MCKINLEY
bill, my friends? Twill tell you abont
the Mckinley bill, it is a good deal like
you and I, it is picture of human
frailty. You and I aim at perfection.
but we are unable to. reach it, and 50
with the Mckinley bill. The men who
passed it no doubt aimed to make IL a,
perfect bill, but as Macauley has truly
said, 1.-THE science of government is an
experimental science.n So of ali
things in the matter of government,
there is nothing so much a matter of
experiment as making and preparing a
tariff bill. Two years ago, Brother
Mills, of the Democratic party, wres-
tied with the subject, and he found it
a most difficult subject. This year the
Republican party has wrestled with it.
and on the whole I want to tell YOU land
I shall enter more into detail) while I
think the bill has some faults, I think
on the whole it is a fairly good bill, and
at all events, my friends, land that is
the great nub of this CONTROVERSY. it is
a better bill than the Mills bill. fGreat
laughter and applause].
I want to keep you, in this tariff
question, to the plain issue. You who
believe In protection reasonably like
protection. 1t is this: Granting, I
say, that the Mckinley bill is not as
good bill as it ought to be, it is suf-
fcent for the Republicans to show that
it is better than the Mills bill or better
than free trade. [Applause.] Now,
that is all the Democrats have to offer
us. They can point to the past, to the
Mills bill, and as to the future, take
them to-day on the hastings and on the
stump and through their papers, what
is it that they recommend? Do they
come and say we want a different kind
of protection2 No, the whole sum and
substance of their arguments, the sum
and substance of their attacks is that
we ought to have free trade in this
country. [Applause.] Now, as I said
a moment ago, there are some features
in the Mckinley bill I don't like. For
instance, the wooden and worsted sched-
ule, I don't think, my friends, after 30
years OF protection, that should have
been raised at all. But that is minor
matter. .,
There is another matter in the Nc
Kinley bill, it has given us free sugar;
and do you know what that means to
the interests of this country? 1t means
the shaking off from the shoulders of
6O,OOO,OOO of people of taxation of
nearly 81 head from every man, wo-
man and child in this country. ZAP
plause. =. !,
Now I want to call your attention to
the leading features of the two bills,
the Mckinley bill and the Mills bill
The leading feature of the Mills bill
was free wool. The effect of putting
wool on the free list in 1883, based
upon the statistics of the last fiscal
year, 1887, would simply relieve the
people of sc, 300, 900 of taxation. Now,
under the Mckinley bill, take the
statistics Of the same year. For the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, we i'm
ported into this country, $68, 1862, 1884
worth of sugar; and on that sugar there
was levied and collected from the
American people $50, 507, 1876, or
amounting to a rate of 82.O4 per cent.
On every dollars worth of sugar i'm
ported into this country we paid a duty
of 82.O4 per cent. Now, the Mckinley
bill has relieved the American people
OF that tax [great applause]; as against
the six million and odd hundred thou
sand dollars on wool in the Mills bill.
Now, What do you suppose the Mills
bill done about sugar? Sugar was
mainly a Southern product. They had
a tenderness for it. Another thing,
the sugar tax comes nearer than any
other Of being a revenue tax, while
the : wool , tax ! is a protective i tax. y,
Mills bill only proposed to cut down
the duty on sugar from an ad valorem
rate Of 81 per cent. to e5.64 per cent
Now, if some gentlemen says: ''Why,
you voted for the Mills bill, how could
you vote for it?'' Now, want to tell
you that in all frankness- as a mat
ter Of apology, I am not here to apollo
gize, but when brother is in camp
meeting it is his duty to tell his
brethren just how he feels and what
his feelings have been in the past.
Laughter and applause I voted for
the Mills bill, first of all, not because
thought it was good bill but because
I voted for it as an expression of nv
sentiments in favor of tariff reform and
tariff reduction. But more than that.
l knew that under our constitution no
tariff bill could originate in the senate,
and I also knew. that any tariff bill,
however mean it might be, if it passed
the house, if it got over to the Repub-
lican senate, would be corrected FAD
plause. But the strangest thing of all
Island you will all smile if l tell YOU,
if let you a little into my confidence.
I have been regarded as sort of d
tariff crank, and yet this Mckinley bill
has Endorsed more of my crank notions
than I supposed until to-day, because
I never looked it up until this forenoon,
just as was coming down here to at!
tend this meeting. And I was fairly