The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1894-10-31

tanned by a, decisive majority" So
mumbles the oracle that renders the
prophecies of mugwumps from the
tripod in the editorial columns Of Har-
per's Weekly. And this, after The cleo
tions north, east, south and west, during
the past year
The New York Evening Posts writer
/ Illustrates the capacity of the mug
wump editor for wiful and diotic mis-
statement, and his presumption upon
the Ignorance or short memory of the
American people. His theme, also, in
recent political article was the passing
of Mckinley and of McKnleyism. Of
the former, evidence IS found in the
tumultuous enthusiasm of the twenty
thousand people who gathered to hear
the great expounder of protection in
New Orleans, and in the ovations of
the people whenever he has appeared
in any part of the country. That Nc.
Kinleyism, by which is meant adequate
and consistent protection to American
industry, was not an intelligent aud
patriotic principle, deliberately adopted
by the republicans at their national
convention in 1888, and faithfully en-
bodied in the Mex nley act by the re-
publicans of the fifty first congress, the
blear-eyed seer of the Post undertakes
TO maintain by narration of alleged
events following the meeting of the
fifty frst congress, that for sheer idi Sy
is som ething marvellous, even in
the shady annals of mugwump politi-
cal discourse. That McKinleyism is
passing away, the Post deduces from a
characteristic line of reasoning. 1t de-
clares that the republicans will not
I" make the tariff issue prominent in any
way in the near future. They shirked
McKinleyism as much as possible in
their last national convention. The
masses of the party had lost what little
faith they bad ever had in it. Conse-
quently it was not mentioned in the
platform, and Nick nley himself re-
ceived only 1872 votes out of 904, or one
fifth Of the whole"
This statement ia curious illustra-
ton of the capacity of the mugwump
editor for inuendo and for sly and ma
licious misstatement. Does any intel
ligent reader of political literature find
in this extract a semblance even of
candid or truthful statement Was the
canvass of 1892 made on evasions, or
was it pushed, from start to finish,
along lines which were but the extern
sion of the old lines behind which the
contest of 1888 was fought. The disin-
genuousness of the Post eliminates in
its statement, and the differences it
would have drawn therefrOm, of the
vote for Mckinley in the convention of
1892 1t is a wel-known fact that Mex n
ley was not candidate before the con-
vention. 1t is a well-known fact that
hundreds of delegates, who doubted the
wisdom of the proposition to nominate
either Blaine or Harrison, were eager
to vote for Mckinley. Against this
desire Mckinley set his face like flint.
His refusal to allow his name to go be-
fore the convention carried with it no
doubt of the irmness and sincerity of
his purpose. The vote for him was
cast under these conditions, and, know
ing all these circumstances, the Post
has the hardihood to taunt him on the
insigni6cance of his vote and to seek to
lead it's readers TO draw the conclusion
that he was unpopular by reason of his
his devotion to the policy of protection.
Could mugwump depravity further gop
Had Mckinley yielded to importantly
and become candidate, observers of
The trend of the sentiment Of the con
ventiOn declared that he would have
been nominated.
But McKinley's name and his doc
trines are marching on, regardless of
the malignity and the vain arts of the
mugwump editor. They are all alike.
Their articles are all cast in the same
mold. From Alpha to Omega, they are
full of lying.