The News-Herald. [volume] (Hillsboro, Highland Co., Ohio) 1886-1973, 1894-10-04
seat M this body, Randall Lee Gibson, snd Ed
NSrd n, Whffe. wanted ID know befsIe We en-

| -. A. .s,- ~ f,.sS.,t = q. dftsu-. s~s "a.
yeas ~ t1{s vsxeyt naiss ns - eo osgS22s e ~ -
| ward u W mite, wantee y Hnow betsse VIC s chs
sereu upon tne eainpa,sn4 !. - .ss.s AZ ss..S .
Toncy OF tnc rnf'y was ~ uc % u1ue. .e - pRw:
emily aree trade resoiations @ auoyteu az oh. M
sso. u, A.te, ssssstss AZ" .,,s ss,,SiJstn ~
o,,s nerfv told them ss that sho Demo.
| cratic party was not TO destroy Industries;
that Il should place q fair duty upon dutiable
articlos.a revenue duty; that tho bill which
nad mee epprovai was .no MILLS u. nu ,'art,, In
,ls .u % rsT,a ns,Is h, r.,,a .Saorata n,c.
tactinn to sngar1 The junior senator from
New Jersey 1Mr. Smithj, the junior senator
from Ohio (Nir. Brice) and myself were then
giving our time, and our money, and every
thing that men can give tor the SUCCESS VI 'no
party.
secres bargain WIN Lo"isi""s'
We conferred with all those distinguished
gentlemen. we were not at the conference
WIN ,ne eanolua,e' @ Dut haa from oo.n slues
H. na,ooorat,o o-canisst;on of which v,e
were part, put the same construction upon
IT, , anu wDu.a Se IN 1nvor a 81 'na' ia ~ s sanpiv.
Syys want 70 tell our neonie the truth. We do
not want to press YOU to give single fraction
Of cent to Louisiana, but we only want to
know the truth" At that solemn conclave we
all said: Yes, II Is dutiapie article.
hou snali nave ~ IT, no man man aa. no LIVING De,ns;
aS o,e. ~. "..n aa ,,rc,,,,sa oto,,t
nnblic or nriyate matters that did not carry
out If had the power to do it. These two
senator's and myself, carrying out our pledge,
have stood here and been gibbeted as three
men who were In the sugar trust.
There is the plain story told in simple
terms, in open senate, in public debate, by
Senator German, one of the most promi-
nent members Of his party in the country.
| What commentary upon Democratic
political methods
An agreement as to the action OF a po-
litical party upon great public question
made in private; made with two senators
and the candidate for president himself;
made to secure the electoral vote of the
state of Louisiana; made in absolute secret
that sugar should be taken from the free
list, where the Republican party had put
it, and be taxed for the benefit OF the Sugar
Trust, which tax should be borne by the
American consumer.
suppose the Bargain Had Been Open.
c,,,,,,o.. pros;do,4 r,,.,,o,ord ard Con.
80 Cor.r - MI. III ,ss,,ad ~,
Sa.,uu - a.. "mu an,,,..,. . o,,no;,,, ~ tha.
thox hod % far modifisd Tho Damocratic
platform as to nroyide for taxed sugar.
what do you think would have been the
effectf Does anybody believe that If this
agreement had been thoroughly under
stood that Mr.. Cleveland would have car
ried the country? No Democratic orator
or editor, certainly in the north, ever SO
much as limited that the boon of free
sugar was to be taken from the people.
The great public was not taken into this
conference. They were not advised of it.
1t was not in the Democratic platform. 1t
was not announced In any Democratic
newspaper. 1t was not talked OF upon the
stump. 1t was private arrangement
with the campaign managers and the
presidential candidate to barter away the
platform of their party for the vote OF
state. It was deception, base and rank. 1t
was fraud upon every voter, north and
south, and the Louisiana planters who re-
lied upon it now declare that they have
been grossly betrayed and deceived.
The president himself, If Senator Cor
man be right, was party to this contract.
and he, too, much as he loathed the bill.
was not unwilling to have the sugar bar
gain carried into effect. Perhaps, too,
this is one OF the hidden reasons why he
did not veto the hideous offspring OF
party perfidy and party dishonorW
whore IL the ImprovemsntY
Aftar most b;tter,v denonnc,no the hi,
/ tbev have inst nassai Denooratic leaders
and nress console tbemseIvea bv declaring
that tho new law after ali ia better than
the act of 1890 BETTER for whom, BETTER
for whats BETTER in which narticnlar,
BETTER for Ohio, Retter for our GREAT
olass fnctor;es, Retter for our tinnlata
works. Retter for our diversified nannfac.
turesp Better for merchandising and
trader BETTER for apricultnre9 BETTER for
having closed foreign market for our
farm products by treaties of reciprocity
Certainly not better in its free list. Not
better in its dutiable list. Not better for
its substitution of ad valorem for specific
duties. Not better for the United States
Not better for American Industries. Not
better for American labor. Not better for
the American farmer.
Where has 1t given hopef Whose facto-
ries will it set to work! 1t has improved,
confessedly improved, no American inter
"a n 4