The Lafayette gazette. [volume] (Lafayette, La.) 1893-1921, 1894-08-11
M'x.NL.v exNeuMeeo.

M'x!NLEv eENeuMcEo.
Projection an Issue UPoa which kepsb
licans Cannot Win.
! Col. A. L. Conger, ex-member Of the
republican national committee fro1r
Ohio aud one Of the most prominent
manufacturers in the middle states,
!, threw oombsheA into tho ranks Of
tne republicans Of Ohio q few days ago
by denouncing, ir the most vigorors
English, the Mckinley tariff sharply
e'riticisin9 Gov: MeKin1ey's adlnio is=
trattoii Of state affairs and pronorinc=
Ing Mckinley Unfit for president. Ia
! reference to the Mckinley bill Col
/ Couger said:
81 have no ill feeling toward Gov
Mckinley. I have always been his
friend. and during the past twenty
Years have contributed more of my
time and means to his success than
any other man in my city or county.
BY his administration of the affairs Of
Ohio, however, he has shown himself
to be untitled for the presidency of the
United States. The men who have al
ways aided him in his political cob.
tests. the friends Of years. he has
cast aside and he is now guided and
controlled by men whose sole inter est
In politics is personal advancement.
They are not the men who are lying
awake nights to devise plans for keep
ing the waeels of their great indus
tries running for the ensuing weeks.
They are not the men who keep people
out of the Poorhouse and free from suf-
fering. 1t is we'll to speak plainly
about this matter. Mckinley could
not carry q single state in the ruion,
upon the Mckinley law. in 1896, and 1
believe that ntne-tehths of the b,lsi-
ness men of the country will concur
with me in the view that the Mckinley
tariff is not only inconsistent but not
in line with the business sentiment of
orr people. We lost the campaign of
1892 ON the Mckinley law and we will
lose that of 1896 If that law be the par
amount Issue. It is unfor tunate for
the republican party that Gov. McKin-
ley's friends should have precipitated
his candidacy at this time.
1--WE were all for him for governor
and his friends have misinterpreted
the large majority he received last
year. That was a protest aginst the
Wilson bill, not an Endorsement of the
McKinley tariff. The business man
learns by experience one day and
profits by it the next. Why should not
Il do not quito understand what all
this political hubbub is about, but the
people who are kicking it up are kill
ing off their candidate and making
votes for Tom Reed every day. Gar
field said in the republican national
convention of 1880, and it has been the
law OF the party ever since, that every
republican should have the right to
criticse tho action of our party lead
ers, and went so far as to say that he |
should not be ostracised or read out of |
his party if for good reasons he could
not vote for his party candidate. I |
have been educated for q high protec- |
hV1t l, ~
ness in some of the leading lines of |
of the country for a num-
Der of years, and during that time have /
learned some things by experience
whiah have changed my views upon tho
tariff question.
carty in Ohio. The correspondents
sending out the news from our recent
state convention said that every plank
Il the platform was first submitted
% the governor for his approval. They
seek to commit the party to the in
lorsement of the Mckinley bill for
500. They also put another plank in
he platform straddling tho silver
question. OF course, we can fairly and
Justly hold the governor RESPONSE bic
or these two propositions the plat
orm upon which he would stan nd in 1896.
$50 far as the Mckinley bill is con-
erned. we lost the campaign in 1892
pun CsAd ASSUo. ne party |
5 for protection. The country has
rospered under it, but as we have
rown older we have needed less pro-
cotton. We meant in. our national
latform in 1sSO-or at least it was the
put upon it by the
arty-that we had now reached q |
ONT in our history when we could af-
ord to make reductions in the tariff.
his was SO stated by our leaders on
he stump, and by the republican 1
ress, but when we put forth the Nc
.inley bill we violated the pledges OF
he party, increased duties, then went
'rth to battle upon the proposition,
nd were beaten. Now, it would I
IMPLY be political suicide to start out !
pom that proposition in 1896. I
1--WE will take, for instance, the SUBJ {
ct of binder Irvine. There are
lree hundred millions of capital in
ested in the manufacture of agri-
,ltara1 implements and farm ma 6
ainery in this country. giving en- r
oyment directly and Indirectly to 6
ore than 300, 900 of Americas labor I
g men. Whatever is good for the |
merican farmer and will advance his G
terests is good for the interests of t
70 manufacturers of agricultural f
achinery and their employees. Their +
osperity must go hand in hand.
any of the leading manufacturers of | O
implements were opposed S
a duty on binder Irvine. a
by request I went before Maj. Nc o
ln1ey when he was framing his bill, II
ID asked that no duty be put upon t.
nder Irvine, and explained to him the, h