The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1892-09-07

the local health officers will cooperate
heartily in regarding the spirit of
this proclamation. The Canadian gov
eminent is moving theoretically, and
the Vermont board of health has issued
circular giving suggestions as to the
prevention Of the disease. All that can
be done in Vermont at present is to see
that all sanitary conditions are as per-
feet as possible, so that the general
health of each community may be good.
Each individual, also, should be per-
sonally very careful of his health. Such
precaution will not be waste of time,
even if the cholera does not make an
entrance to the American continent.
MORRILL, GODDARD, city editor of
the New York World, is hustler
whom that paper prizes for his capac-
ity in inventing ways of effecting
"scoops" and his nerve in carrying
them out. Yet cheek and impudence
sometimes fail, as they did in his latest
attempt to make a sensation. With
one or two assistants he tried to board
the cholera-infested Moravia, but the
party was arrested and the young man
was advised that any more attempts of
the sort might end in his being shot.
Apparently Mr.. Goddard cared more
for scoop" for the World than for
the health of thousands of persons in
New York city, for successful visit to
the Moravia very likely would have re-
suited in the introduction of the dread
disease into the city. There is limit
to journalistic enterprise, but Mr..
Goddard does not recognize it. This
is not the first case in which he has
disregarded the proprieties in his race
for sensation. AT the funeral of Gen
eral Grant he managed to get his car
riage into the funeral procession i'm
mediately behind that of Mrs. Grant,
thus beating the town in his report.
Again, when the typhus fever was in
New York, last winter, Mr.. Goddard
with one of his reporters made a
stealthy midnight visit to the island
where the typhus patients were kept,
and got an exclusive on it..
THE London Financial NeaUS, COM
menting upon the report of the senate
finance committee, indicates its surprise
at the facts revealed in that document.
1t says: is it indeed possible that
English critics, in their traditional ven
Grafton for the principles of free trade,
have been hopelessly and egregiously
wrong? Were our own expectations, in
common with those of the majority of
public commentators, founded on an
entire misconception of the probable
effects of a protective policy in the
states2 If this report be not a tissue of
artfully-contrived fabrications it would
really seem that these questions ought
to be answered in the affirmative. 1t
is, of course, far from improbable that
the report has been prepared by adher-
ents of McKinleyism. The time of its
publication is at least suspiciously op-
perfume, and party zeal in America
would scarcely hesitate at even such
method of demolishing opposition. But,
when all is said and done, there stand
the positive statements of the sub
committee in all their force. Accord
ing to these, the cost of living has
actually declined in the United States
since the adoption of the Mckinley act,
whereas in Great Britain it has in
creased. We rub our eyes in amaze
mentl" The editor of this paper
should remember that Lord Salisbury
has already caught some CLEANS of the
truth. Indeed, there are men enough
in Great Britain who know very we'll
that free trade is not the wise policy
for any other nation. 1t is her best
policy because she got the start of the
world in manufacturing and built up
great industries, until now all she needs
is a market. Free trade is all right for
Great Britain, but the newer countries
are dull if they do not encourage the
development of their own resources.
-
The Presidents Letter.
|