The Hazel Green herald. [volume] (Hazel Green, Wolfe County, Ky.) 1885-19??, 1891-12-04
uLAlNE'S LETTER.
More DoubIe-Do'lIng by Jim the Pollh-
cal Trickster.


cal Trlckster.
Mr.. Elaine has temporarily recov-
cred hin health sufficiently TO write n
letter stlbbing i'm the back the author
Of the protection.run Mr.. Blaine
has not added To his letter the request
Burn this" On the contrary, 10 is
given 10 the press rs freely ms IL its
author had no fear of an investigating
committee. Note the cunning with
which the Maine statesman inflicts his
stab. lie AYERS that the following
sentence is "garbled" "But there is
not a section or line in the Mckinley
bill that will open market for an
other bushel Of wheat or another bar
rel of pork And he says that tho fol-
lowing is what he did write: But
there Is not section or line in the
entire bill that will open market for
another bushcl of wheat or another
pound Of pork" OF course careful
lctter.writcr like Mr. Blaine will dis
cover that I'm the two above quotations
there is but one discrepancy, and that
IL refers to the title of the bill. In the
one case IL was unnecessary for the III
Ilt VI VIC blll W Dt anu III VIC
other IL was. On this hangs Mr..
Blaincs plea that his words have been
garbled. And he must be granted full
credit for his observance of the facts.
Mr.. Blaine has not hit SO near the
truth before in half century.
But what does this letter really
mean? 1t is perfectly understood that
Mr.. Mckinley was as strongly opposed
to the reciprocity clause as was Mr..
Blaine to the ultra.protcction idea of
Mckinley and Tom Reed. II is too
late To argue away the effect of the
scene when Mr.. Blaine spoiled u new
hat in giving vent to his anger at Me-
Kinley and his whole tribe. He now
says that he is in favor of the McKin-
ley bill since IL contains the patent rec.
lprocity provision. He shows that
the only way in which he can see that
an additional market has been secured
has been by provisions that are direct
ly in contravention To the Mckinley
idea and that were foistcd on the bill
against McKinley's protest.
Mr. Blaine says: 81 am not, there
fore, an opponent Of the Mckinley
bill, as the democratic papers of Ohio
are constantly alleging. On the CON
trary, | have constantly supported it
ever since it was perfected by the in
sertion of the reciprocity clause" Mr.
Mckinley is welcome to the good fleet
he may receive from such an indorsc-
ment Mr.. Blaine admits that he OPP.
posed Mckinlcyism as expressed in the
bill he so vigorously denounced. He
does not even deny the little episode of
the crushed hat. But he says he has
perfected by the insertion of the reel
procity clause" Nor do democratic
papers in Ohio or elsewhere say that
Mr., Blaine ''is' opposed to the present
tariff bill. They simply repeat his
own words TO show that nc once de-
nounccd Mckinley and his bill. If
Ohio republicans cannot see in this
stab at their candidate they will per-
haps better understand MIR. Blaine'S
letter after election. Its publication
follows closely upon very close con-
ference of certain gentlemen of the <.
O. p known to be friendly to the am
bition OF the Mulligan statesman Per-
hapS Ret GARRISON and Mr. COngCr
could tell why this letter of Blainc's
was put forth with the ostcnsibie pur-
pose of helping Mckinley by showing
that his bill became worthy OF support
only after being impressed with the
statecraft of Blaine. Chicago Times.