New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1894-08-22
LIVELY SHAKING Up
FOR Mr.. D0INELlY.
Ridiculed Statements Made
in a St. Paul Speech
by Mr.. Horn,
Who Replies with Terrific
Battery of Dignified
Argument.
Populist Fallacies Thoroughly
Flayed by Republican
WISDOM.
DONNELLY VS.. HORR.

When the Minnesota Republican
State Convention met in st. Paul July
II, a very earnest address was made by
Mr.. Horn, of New York, but formerly
Michigan Congressman. He devoted
considerable time to the Peoples Party,
while speaking, and discussed some of
the alleged reforms that the new party
would inaugurate.
Ignatius Donnelly, in a recent issue
of his paper, ridiculed the public state
ments made by Mr.. Horr, who in turn
discusses the whole matter in the New
York Tribune.
Donnelly VS.. Horr.
Mr.. Horn says in the Tribune:
am in receipt Of an article published in
The Representative, a Populist paper To-
Gated in Minneapolis. The person who
sends it states that it was written by Igna-
thus Donnelly. [ should think there must
be some mistake about that, because the
entire article is full of billingsgate and
low personal filings, and man Of the liter
airy reputation of Mr.. Donnelly would
hardly be expected to stoop to such vulgar
journalism; but the initials Il Dr. with
which the article is signed, seem to decide
the question against me, and I assume
that my Minnesota correspondent is cor
rect in his statement.
AS rule, never notice public criticisms
of my public work when they are couched
in language which shows their author,
whoever he may be, to lack ordinary po-
likeness. When one is writing for publ
cation he can never afford to use the Ian
guage of the common blackguard Nc
matter how cultivated and refined he NAV
be, decent and well-informed people will
classify him in the vocabulary he himself
uses as blackguard, when in fact the in
dividual may be capable of better things
IT one happens to catch him lat his best"
Epithets are not arguments. They are
seldom used except when their authors
lack better material.
L was in St. Paul when the Republican
state convention met, and had the honor
OF addressing the delegates there assem-
bled for the space of As minutes visited
st. Paul for that very purpose. II. D."
asserts that was sent there by the New
York Tribune. What difference would it
make whether was employed by the New
York Tribune or not? [ have no means of
support except my earnings from month
to month. Is it disgrace to be employed
by great metropolitan journal, such as
the New York Tribune is everywhere &C
knowledged to be? If so, then I acknowl-
edge my disgrace. 1t is also true that do
large amount of campaign work for the
Tribune. Is there anything wrong about
that? 1t my views agree with those of
the Tribune, and the managers of that
paper see fit to keep me engaged in teach
ing such views from the platform, have
they not a perfect right so to do? If 1
teach the truth, does it make my utter
ances any the less true because am con-
stantly employed on the New York Trib-
une? Has not the Tribune perfect right
TO select its own methods of education?
Then what does any intelligent man ex-
pect to gain by asserting that I am in
some way connected with the New York
Tribune? I have never sought in any way
to deny that fact. 1t is the kind of work
which man does for which he should be
held responsible.
The wrath of this Populistw writer seems
to have been aroused by some things
winch said at that state convention.
The right to criticise is denied to no one.
now invite the attention of my readers to
some Of those criticisms.
What Reduced Wages.
l quote from the article in the Repre-
sentative, signed II. D."
Mr. Horr said:
whenever you reduce wages. YOU stop
consumption, and then the markets are
ruined''
II. D." replies:
We'll, who in thunder reduced wages? 1t
was your Republican party. when it de-
monetlzed silver in 1873, and made the
gold dollar the equivalent of twice as
much OF the workman's muscle and the
farmers toll. And now you come here to
enhghten the western hobos with your
shallow platitudes. Scat Get out!
The trouble with this statement is that
it is not true. Wages did not begin to
decline after the passage of the act Of 1879.
Indeed, during the 20 years from 1873 to
1888, the wages of the workingmen of the
United States were increased per canita
The members of the senate committea
who investigated that point renorted
unanimously to that effect, without regard
to party affiliations.
There may have been few isolated
Instances in which wages were lowered in
the United States between those dates
but taken. in the aggregate, the wages
PAID IN gold dollars to each iaboring man
were increased during those 20 years. The
claim has been constantly made during
those years by nearly all the farmers
Journals of the country that there had
been decline in the price of farm
products, but that the wages of hired
hands had been nowhere less, and in many
Instances had been higher than they were
20 years ago. s, 5. =
THE DROPPING OFWAGES WHICH
HAS RUINED. OUR HOME MARKETS
TOOK PLACEAFTER THE ELECTION
iOF 1892 -During the years 1889, 1890 and
Ils9l the people of this country were we'll
iemployed, and at good wages. During
those years Travelled over 100 600 miles.
entirely within the United States. Go
where I would found factories running,
t&r,J1 11,~ Il u : 2 L -