Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-10-17
IT Was MISQUOTED.
Vas Deliberately lisquotel b. Dema.
esats iol Political Purposes.
He Cerrects the Natter and Fully Ex.
plains His Statement.

NEw YoRK, Oct. l6 An Oaio editor
has written Mr.. Blaine that the Dem ,cratic
papers are psrsdins him - An opponent Of
the Mckinley bill, and he replys:
AUGUSTA, Me-, Oct. IA, 1891.
JOHN HopLEY, ESQ, editor Of the Journal,
Bucyrus, Ohio.
Ny Dean SuR-Y5u infom me that the
Dsmeesstic paper OF your town and many
Denccraic papers throu Ihour Ohio, keep
the following paragraph standing in type
But there is not . section or . lice 10 the
eafire bill Mckinley tariff that will open
. market for another busnel Of wheat or
another barrel Of pork james G Blaine
to Senator Frye, July IL, 1890.
This sentence 10 CARRIED AM taken from
impression. What did say is the follow.
ing: II DO not doubt that in many re
speets the tariff bin pending an the Senate
is a JHst measure and most Of ,ss provisions
are IN aeeordaAee 1ith the HsSe policy OF
protection. But there 10 not 9 section or =
line in ste entire bill that will open . mar
kst for another bushel Of wheat or another
pou I'd Of pork"
The letter in which this paragraph occurs
WAS written tc Senzto- Frye, July IL, 1880,
knd the Mckinley bill did not bscome law
until Oct 1.t, nearly three months after
that. In my letter to Senator Frye OBJ
.c.ed 70 the bill because it did not contain
the reciprocity clause which would provide
= market for whest AID pork, the other
products of she farm, and various fabrics.
Before the bill was faslly passed, the
reciprocity clause was inserted, and large
addition made to the free list. Il. viii.
therefore, be seen from what said iu my
letter that the objection / made to the Nc
Kinley bill was entirely remove before the
bill became law.
Let me further say that the reciprocity
olsuse hss given market for many lrrsis
Of fl " and many pounds Of PORK.
Brszl 0 ime oaths since entered into q
treaty oy which many American articles
are admitted free. Flour was made free
and pork WAS admitted ashominal duty.
Cuba aud Porto Rico have reduced the
duty on q lur from S5 so q barrel to 81,
(Which gives us the ma,ket), besides put
ting nesrly hundred articles of American
production on the free list.
San Domilgo made reciprocity treaty
with fl )ur and pork upon the free list, be-
sides large NUMBER Of other articles.
Other treaties for recipro city are in pro-
gress. Germany, without negotiating .
formal treaty, removed the prohibition on
pork, and our government in consideration
thereof has left her sugar on the free list.
This opens to MS an entirely new market
and SIS, 900 coo to S20,000,0 900 worth Of
American pork will De consumed per an
nun where not pouad was taken for 10
years. The reciprocity provision is prov
ing very successful, especially in farm
products and more especially in the case
of the two articles mentioned in the para
graph quoted, -four and pork and I am not,
therefore, sn opponent Of the Mckinley
bill, as the Democratic papers of Ohio are
constantly alleging. On the contrary,
have supported it ever since it was per-
feeted. Very respectfully yours,
JAMES G. BLAINE,