Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1891-10-17
BLAINE LIKES THE BILL.
He Says the Mckinley Act Is
All Right.
NOT AN ENEMY OF THE MEASURE

The Secretary of. State Says That Hs
Has Cordially Approved of the New
Tariff Law Ever Since the Reciprocity
Clause Became Part Of IL.
NEW YORK, Oct 1T-An Ohio editor hav
ing written Mr.. Blaine that the Democratic
papers were parading him as an opponeu,
of the Mckinley bill he replies as follows:
AUGUSTA. Me, Oct "a. 1891
John Hopley, Esq Editor Of The Journal,
Bucyrus o.;
NY DnAR SIR You inform me that tho
Democratic paper in your town, and many
Democratic papers throughout Ohio, keep the
following paragraph standing Ia type:
But there is not section or line in the en-.
tire bill (Mcikinley tariff that win open
market for another bushel Of wheat or another
barrel Of pork.-James @. Blaine TO Senator
FRYE, July II, 1907
This sentepee il garblea and taken from ia
proper connection. Il creates a wrong impres.
sion What did say Ia the following:
what MIR. Blaine Did Say.
~ do not doubt that In many RESPECTS tho
tarih bill pending in the senate ie Just meas,
ure and that most Of is provisions are Ia ac
eordance with the wise policy Of protection,
but there is not section or a line In the entira
bill that viii open a market for another busheI
Va "hA+tt VI aANAANA lNNnu VI INlhs
The letter in which this paragraph occurs
was written 70 Senator Frye on July II. 1890.
and the Mckinley bill did not become a law un.
I'll Oct I nearly three months thereafter In
my letter To Senator Frye objected 10 the hill
because IL did not contain reciprocity clause,
which would provide market for wheat and
pork, for other products Of the farm and foi
various fabrics.
His Objections Were All Needed.
Before the bill was finally passed the reel.
prOcty clause was inserted and large addition
was made 20 the free list Il will therefore,
be seen from what said IN my letter that the
objection which ! made 70 the Mckinley Hill
was entirely removed before the bill became a
law. Lot me further say that the reciprocity
clause has given ample market for many bar
rels Of -four and many pounds Of pork. Brazil,
some months since, entered into a treaty by
which many American articles ARE admitted
free, Flour is made free and pork Is admitted
at a nominal duty. Cuba and Porto Rico have
reduced the duty on -four from $3.50 a barre
to 81 (which gives us the market), besides put
ting nearly 100 articles OF American production
on the free list
sRn Domingo has made a reciprocity treaty
with -four and pork upon the free list besides
large number Of other articles. Other trea
ties forreciprocity are In progress
Big Boom for Salt Pork.
Germany, without negotiating forma
treaty mas removed the prohibition on pork
and our government, in consideration thereof
has left her sugar on the free list. This open,
% ua al entirely new market, and sl8O00O0D .,
| s20Wn,o0 OF American pork will be consumed
per annum where not pound has been takei
i for ten years.
The reciprocity provision "a proving YER
auccessful, especially Ia farm products, an,
more particularly in the case of the two art
| cles mentioned IN the paragraph quoted hou
| and pork l am not, therefore. an opponent ,
the Mckinley bin, a. the Democratic papers
Ohio are constantly singing. On the confrar
have cordially supported Il ever since IL WI
perfected by the Insertion Of the reciprocil
clause Very respectfully yours.
JAMES q. BLAINE