St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-11-26
Congressman Warner Re.
quests His Views on Mills
for Speaker.
The Distinguished Senator Is
Generous in His Estimate
Of the Texan.
Wise Pointers on the Tariff
Reform Agitation Now in
Progress.
1t Should Be Kept in Front al
All Times--Blaine Has
the Call.

NEW YORK, Nov. 25.-Under date Oh
Nov. II, Congressman }. d. Warner
wrote as follows to Senator John G..
Carlisle: My Dear Sir-Hon. Roger O.
Mills, as you know, is prominent can
didate for the speakership on the
ground of his services to his
party and to the principles to
which the success of the Fifty
second congress owes its unprece-
dented Democratic majority. | not
merely recognize the strength of his
claim, based on his record. but the fact
that every Democratic member of con-
gresS whom l know to be in favor of
RELOCATING tariff reform to the rear is
opposed to Mr.. Mills, has added TO the
indications that l am right in my prefer
ence.
1t is. however, asserted that Mr.. Mills
IS untitled by temperament to make a
dignifed and effective officer of the
house. L know of 10 one whose opinion
on that matter would have more weight
with others, as we'll as myself, than
would your own. May | beg an
expression of your opinion in
such regard. While l should great
ly prefer to be allowed to use
such reply as you may send me, shall,
of course. be glad to consider it conf
dental to any extent you may indicate.
| appreciate also the delicacy of the SUBJ
Ject matter involved, and the possible
reasons for your preferring to be silent
upon the subject, whatever may be
your opinion. and shall not con-
slider it either discOurteOus to
myself or allow it to prejudice me
against Mr.. Mills should you not an
sWer this letter. | should. however,
place snch reliance upon your judgment
that | greatly hope to have the benefit
of IL; and | know SO we'll the great
weight that others would give to any
expression OF your opinion that | cam
not but hope you will permit me to use
1t. john ID. WARNER.
Carlisie's Reply.
To this letter Mr. Carlisle, writing
from Washington, Nov. 81, replied as
follows:
Dear Sir: The charge that Hon. Roger
@. Mills is "unfittedby temperament to
make dignitied and effective presiding
officer Gf the house," does that
gentleman very great injustice.
Mr.. Mills is earnest and courag-
cons in the maintenance of his opinion.
but he is just and impartial in the dis
charge of his public duties, and always
accOrdS to his opponents the-sanl con-
sideratiOn he claims for himself.
Before his appointment as chairman
OF the committee on ways and
means in the tiftieth congress the same
objections to which you now refer was
urged against him, and there we've
many who expressed the fear that his
views were TO extreme for the posi-
ton. and that he might recommend leg
islatiOn upon the tariff of such radical
character that the party would be I'M
willing 10 indOrse it; but the provis-
ions of the proposed bill, and the man.
ner in which it was managed in the
committee and in the house, showed
sions were unfounded. His bill was
a very conservative one, and his advo-
cacy or it was able and judiciOus from
the beginning to the close OF the dis
cuSsiOn. If elected speaker am sure
that the same spirit of moderation would
characterize his administration of that
office, and that no one would ever have
just cause 70 complain of his demeanOr
while presiding. or of his general course
Oh political questions.
United Or TarifRefOrm.
Having answered your inquiry. per-
haDs | ought to say no more; but i will
venture to odd q word upon another
subject to which you incidentally al
Jude. 1t unfortunately true that there
is disposition in some quarters to sub
ordinate the question of tariff reform to
others which are now, in my opinion,
far less important to the people and
far more dangerous to the harmony and
success of the Democratic party. Upon
the tariff question we are practically
united, while upon the silver question,
and perhaps Upon some others, there are
wide and honest differences of opinion
among members of our own party-dif-
ferenceS which can be recOnciled only
by patient deliberatiOn and the exercise
of liberal spirit of forbearance and
federation.
Why shall we on the eve of a great
national contest, when victory is almost
within our grasp abandon or ignore a
vital issue upon which we are united
and waste our strength in a fruitless
controversy among ourselves over cues
lions which can be better adjusted after
it has been determined what part OF
their own earnings the people shall be
permitted to keep? Let us do one thing
at time and all things ii their proper
order. The first duty of the Democratic
party and of all who SympathiZe with it
TO change the laws under which the
earnings of the people are taken awav
from them by unjust taxation for pri-
Vate purposes, and whoever proposes TO
postpone the performance of their duty
i'll order TO inaugurate war among
ourselves over the silver question, or
any other question, is not a wise coun-
SellOr. and would not make a safe lead.
er. Yours truly, JOHN q. CARLISLE.