Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1894-07-19
MoNoPoL.sT,c RuNcoMeE.
How the Mckinley Doctrine Is Preachot
by Pampered Pandere-s.

L GONNO"
How the Mckinley Doctrine Is Preachet
by Pampered Pandere-s.
80 rogue e'er felt the halter draw
+, with good opinion of the law or the
= tstrict attorney, and the Manchester
! M and Farmer, chief protection
fNunAo steerer for the state of New
n amp>. hire, protests most earnestly
against my kicking it's large protec.
ton 1Hsnraci.e. in reply to my indict.
ment, 81 sssm-es the republican voters
whom it Is unloading and befooling
on this question:
1. That am hired writer for the
sugar trust, paid by it to defend its
thefts.
2. That there Is now no tax on su.
gar; that the Mckinley bill put sugar
on the free list, sad that the wicked
democrats are now trying to put a tax
on sugar that will benefit the trust by
So. so per ton.
8. 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 abomina BILE
free trade" in sugar of the Mckinley
bill, that the sugar trust has grown
rich and insoIent.
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 repu bHcan party next No
vember is worth $40 in crisp green
backs to the league of four hundred
and fifty American protected trusts.
and if bluffing will keep even one vote
from straying, it does not propose to
lose that one, or its percentage on any
one'it can steer into the game for its
employers to ssvindle.. That it is GRIM
inally dishonest. that it is partner of
the protection thieves. sharing their
plumber, must be the unbiased opinion,
VI nOucSt man VINO READS us an
swer-to my straightforward statement
of facts and figures. not one of which,
it attempts to impeach.
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
1t. The well-Shod heels Of that animal are
the heels Of an that Is st sggering under the
load his brutal owners have piled upon him.
and whose voice is badly broken b. the bray
ing which q cruel keeper EFFORTS from him
with the goad. But listen further to the noise
that comes echoiny frem among the bats that
mes. in his stomach up through the vacuum in
his skull and out through the orif,ces 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
SLIGO per ton: that the proposed SEN
ate bill reduces this Mckinley protec-
ton of the trust to "A duty of $3.50 per
ton. It cannot deny that the sugar
trust yearly receives under the Nc
Kinley law $40. O00. 900 blood money and
blackmail. 1t cannot deny that the
senate bill substitutes a 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 compe1s the sugar
trust to pay into the treasury SIS, O00-
900 of the $50. 900. 900 blackmail now
paid to it yearly by the people. and
that all other taxes on sugar levied by
the senate bill go, into the treasury
Itdoes not deny. and cannot deny. that
under the Mckinley bill we must pay to
the sugar trus. $40. 1000, 900 blac.1mail
yearly. as we have done since 1899. and it
does not deny that the defeat of a dem
ocratlc reform measure which cuts this
blackmail down is what the trust
is working for. It cannot meet
facts or figures. It. dare not quote
the present law or the proposed law.
There is nothing left but to denounce
me as the paid advocate of the sugar
trust. between 1885,; and 1890 there was
not a. fact or a figure in connection
with the exposure of the sugar trusts
thefts used in any newspaper or in any
public utterapce that did not supply:
no other writer furnished anything:
and this same defender of protection
then denounced me for my persistent
attack on the sugar trust. as 1.-The paid
clerk of gang of foreign importers"
as "a liar hired by British gold to de-
fame honest men. The exposure that
/ made of the sugar trust biackmail
between 1856 and 1890 forced a reduc-
ton to the present theft of 100000 900.
BecauseI am fighting now to either cut
this blackmail off altog ether or reduce
it to $1,000. 900. this protection bunco-
steerer 'denounces me as the paid agent
of the trust. in order to defeat any
nge' and keep the $50. 900, 900 black
w j for the trust. 1t is an old trick of
pickpockeu to shout stop thief
is aocuser: This editor has such
~ fdence in the stupidity and ignor-
po[e of his readers that he knows it
ION be successful in diverting atten-'
from himself to call me. a, hire
pent- of; the sugar trust" Not one of
c. readers cares enough for the truth
i'm him down to the figures and
S. if he had sufficient intelligence,
Understand them.-Tariff Rule, in
Dr.. World.