The Neihart herald. [volume] (Neihart, Mont.) 1890-1901, 1892-10-22
M'KINLEY DISSECTS.
HIS VICTIMS ARE SENATOR HILL
AND MR.. WILSON.

All Address Before the Philadelphia
Manufacturers Club, Expcae" Demo,
cratic Inconsistencies.
The following is a portion of Governor
McKinley's recent Philadelphia speech,
taken from a verbatim report published
in The Times, Of that city:
Senator Hill, of New York. in his re-
cent speech in brooklyn, rejects the
tariff plank of the national platform and
announces one for himself. His Is d
tariff for revenue only with incidental
or accidental protection, but that may
do him no injustice | will read you the
exact words of his speech:
1--WE believe i'll revenue with INCL
dental protection, and not IN protection
with incidental revenue. In so far a.
the tariff is necessary to meet the neces-
sites of the government it may be inn
posed, and any other benefits which may
be ~legitimately derived from its imposi
ton may, and do unnecessarily, accompany
it.. If the burden opposed would opera''
to prevent foreign competition the bene
fit is indirect and unobjectionable-tha
is, if it comes by accident it is unobjec
tionable.'
Reading further from Mr.. Hill:
speech, he says: president Harrison j,
his ingenious letter of acceptance en-
deavors to place our party in a false at
titude by calling attention to the fac
that while IL platform in 1884, re
adopted in 1888, contains an express
plank upon this question of the equaliza
ton Of wages, yet it was omitted II,
1899, and asserts Chat is, the president
does) that we have changed u posi-.
ton"
Mr.. Hill says: 81 beg to differ with
him. There has been no change. 1t is
not always practicable to place in a plat
form the details of proposed legisla-
ton" Whenever you require a bill Of
his particulars. then you have got Il
Democrat!
THE platforms of 1884 and 1885,
this is still from Mr.. Hill, "were elab-
crate and lengthy, and it was desirable
to simplify them. General principles
were stated in 1892 rather than particu-
lars, as in 1884. We stand not only
upon our platform Of 1892, but upon the
Mills bill"
The Mills bill! They stood on that in
1888 until after the election, and this
is the first suggestion of a revival Of il
that | have heard since, for you will re-
member that the house of representa-
tives of the Fifty-second congress, which
was Democratic by $40 majority, re-
iected the author of the Mills bill and
refused to make him speaker, and when
they came to make tariff legislation re
jected the whole principle Of the Mills
bill.
I'VE stand not only upon u w
platform of 1899, but upon the Mills
bill, which was the latest general Demo
cratic legislation upon tariff subjects"
am glad that Senator Hill doesn't
count what was done by the Fifty-sec-
ond congress-. He doesn't count that as
amounting to anything, for he calls the
legislation of four years ago the last
legislation of the Democratic party.
Then he ays eff | were asked to de-
fine as concisely as possible the whole
Democratic policy | should state it II
substantially these words: we favor a
tariff for revenue only, limited to the
necessities of the government, ecOmlcaliy
administered and SO adjusted in its ap
plication as to encourage productive in
dustries at home and afford just com
pensation to labor, but not to create OF
foster monopolies. These are the car
dinal principles upon which the details
Of all tariff legislation should be based.
That is the platform Of 1884 and of 1888"
Now this explanation of the position
of the Democratic party might go with
out question, as it has gone in many
campaigns of the past, but for the fact
that the very thing that Mr.. Hill says
in his new platform-that very thing
was rejected by the national Democratic
| convention of 1892. 1t was stricken out
by the vote of 5S4 to 333-the very thing
he employs-and this explanation of the
Democratic position might go unchal-
lenged, even from Senator Hill, but for
the fact that Grover Cleveland, in his
Madison Square garden speech, APP
proved OF the platform at Chicago and
accepted nomination N it.
Hill would make a platform for the
Democratic party. He isn't in d position
to do it. speak of him with great re-
spect and without meaning any dis
courtesy, and hoping that it will be JUST
fed in honorable debate. | want t,
-,,rroc to hin, fhnf NOT On1v yJvaC bic
platform rejected. but he himself was
rejected.
The ipse dixit might be accepted but
for the utterances of the Hon. William
l.. Wilson, of West Virginia, who pre-,
sided we the deliberations of the ra-
tional convention of 1892, and he, who
is one of the best informed and the most
cultivated of the tariff reformers of the
United States, calls the language EN-
ployed by Mr.. Hill as a ''makeshift" and
a ''straddle" in his article in the Sep
TENDER number of The North American
Review, that of this month. Listen tc
what Mr.. Wilson says:
"Whep the recent convention met at
Chicago the representatives of the Dem
Ocratlc farty were united n jealous
in their devotion to tariff reform, and
full of the confidence born Of many vic
tories freshly won under its banner.
They expected a clear and courageous
statement of fundamental party prin.
ciple, and Of the party's attitude to ex.
isting law.
The resolutions" says Mr.. Wilson.
:sas reported to the committee, left
nothing to be desired on the latter head
THAT means its Indignation at the new
tariff law, but instead of the former
contained IA preliminary paragraph OF
two in which, with much that was ad-
mirable, appeared some of the familiar
bat now unsatisfactory phrases of the
makeshift of 1884"
But Mr.. Hill says there is no essential
difference between the platforms OF 1854
and 1892.
THE convention" says N;r. Wilarn
with very slight protest from the co:;
mittee on platform. took the risk ol
striking out these Pr" es and tn II