Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1894-07-19
MohoPousr,c suNooMeE.
How the Mckinley Doctrine Is Preached
by Pampered Panderers.


How the Mckinley Doctrine Is Preached
by Pampered Pandarers.
No rogue e'er felt the halter draw
with good opinion of the law or the
district attorney, and the Manchester
Mirror and Farmer, chief protection
0uDco steerer for the state of New
Hampshire, protests most earnestly
against my kicking its large protec-
tion paunche- In reply to my indict-
ment, it assures the republican voters
whom it is misleading and befooling
on this question:
1. That am hired writer for the
sugar trust, paid by it to defend it's
thefts-
2. That there is now no tax on su-
gar; that the Mckinley bill put sugar
on the free list, and that the wicked
democrats are now trying to put tax
on sugar that will benefit the trust by
SIS per ton.
g. That there never was a sugar trust
under republican legislation, or while
the republicans taxed sugar, and that
it is under the law putting sugar on
the free list, under the abominable
free trade" in sugar of the Mckinley
bill, that the sugar trust has grown
rich and insolent.
4. That every man Except one) in
the sugar trust is a democrat, and that
all the contributions of the sugar trust
have been made to the democratic
party.
There are many more statements of
this kind with which it proposes to
hoodwink the ignorant and vicious re-
publican voters OF New Hampshire
too ignorant to refer to the law and
see for themselves what the facts are;
too vicious to even care what the facts
are when the truth has been shown
them Each republican vote which
this protection bunco-steerer can re-
tain for the republican party next No
vember is worth S110 in crisp green
backs to the league of four hundred
and fifty American protected trusts,
and If blufing will keep even one vote
from straying, it does not propose to
lose that one, or its percentage on any
one 1t can steer into the game for its
employers to swindle. That it is Grim
inally dishonest. that it is partner of
the protection thieves, sharing their
plumber, must be the un biased opinion
of any honest man who reads its an
swer to my straightforward statement
of facts and figures, not one of which
1t attempts TO 1mpeach.
This World hireling OF the gang that has
planned and Is about to execute this stu
pendous robbery calls the pending bill one to
reduce the profits of the trust three-fourths,
and says he proposes to plant his well-shod
heels square In the stomach of all who oppose
it. The well-shod heels of that animal are
the heels of an ass that is staggering under the
load his brutal owners have piled upon him,
and whose voice is badly broken by the bray
| ing which a cruel keeper EFFORTS from him
with the goad. But listen further to the noise
that comes echoing from among the bats that
nest N his stomach up through the vacuum in
| his skull and out through the orihces OF his
| vile nose"
That is its only answer to my state
ment that the Mckinley bill "pro-
tects" the sugar trust with duty OF
S11.20 per ton; that the proposed SEN
ate bill reduces this Mckinley protec-
ton OF the trust to duty of So. so per
ton. It cannot deny that the sugar
| trust yearly receives under the Nc
Kinley law $40. 900, 900 blood money and
blackmail. 1t cannot deny that the
senate bill substitutes tax of one
eighth of a cent in place of the present
tax of one-half of a cent, as the pro-
lection of the trust. 1t cannot deny
that the senate bill compels the sugar
trust to pay into the treasury S15, oOO,.
900 of the $40. O00, 900 blackmail now
paid to it yearly by the people, and
that all other taxes on sugar levied by
the senate DILL go into Ghe treasury
Itdoes not deny. and cannot deny, thai
under the Mckinley bill we must pay tc
the sugar trust $40, 600, 900 blackmai
yearly, as we have done since 1890, and II
does not deny that the defeat of dem
ocratlc reform measure which cuts thi:
blackmajl down is what the trust
is working for. It cannot NEE
facts or figures. It dare not quote
the present law OR the proposed law
: There is nothing left but to denounc,
me as the paid advocate of the sugal
trust! Between 1885 and 1890 there wa
not a fact or a figure in connection
with the exposure of the sugar trust
, thefts used in any newspaper or in an,
public utterance that did not supply
, no other writer furnished anything
and this same defender of protection
then denounced me for my persisten
attack on the sugar trust, as 1.-The pait
clerk of gang of foreign importers,
as "a liar hired by British gold" to de
fame honest men. The exposure tina
I made of the sugar trust blackmai
between 1886 and 1890 forced a reduc
, ton to the present theft of $40, 900. 600
, Because 1 am fighting now to either GU
, this blackmail off altog ether or reduc
, it to S., 900, 900, this protection bunco
r steerer denounces me as the paid agen
of the trust. in order to defeat an
change and keep the sac, 1000, 900 black
! mail for the trust. 1t is an old trick o
the pickpocket to shout stop thief
at his accuser. This editor has sucl
confidence in the stupidity and ignor
ance of his readers that he knows 1
will be successful in diverting atten
ton from himself to call me a hire
ling of the sugar trust" Not one O
. his readers cares enough for the trutl
. to pin him down to the figures an
facts, if he had sufficient intelligence
to understand them.-Tarif Rule, il
N. Y. World.
DEFICIT PRODUCERS.