St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-02-22
THE SAME OLD STORY.

Since last May there have been dinned
nto the ears of this people of this coun-
try by despairing congressman. by Wild
eyed editors, and by shallow-brained
men Oh the streets, in the clubs. the
shops, everywhere, predictions OF dis
aster to come should the Democrats pass
a bill reducing taxes, coupled with the
assertion that the panic that eliminated
II and burst in fury IN the land was
generated in a general apprehension OF
tariff reduction.
These narrowing words may be taken
as a type of it all. No one of our read
ers who has been SO unfortunate as to
have. been obliged to either read or
listen to the croakings of these birds of
ill-omen but will recognize them as
having a familiar sound. In one way
or another these prophecies have been
presented to them daily. Read this:
II venture to say, though not in the
habit of making predictions. if this bill
passes, the days of Democratic progress,
forward, upward. every way but down
ward, are at an end. = X = 1t will
ruin not only the hundreds of thousands
engaged in the labor of the land. but the
value of the land itself; it will bring
ruin to the manufacturer, ruin to the
agrlculturiSt, ruin to the planter, ruin
to the public credit, ruin to the peace,
comfort and virtues of the people. We
believe that it will PROSTATE nine tenths
OF the laborerS of the land; that it will
destroy those who assist us in paying
taxes, IN building school houses, in
erecting churches, and in sustaining
the flag and honor of the nation. Plenty
Will, we think, be succeeded by want;
Industry and virtue give place to idle
ness and vice; prosperous villages be-
made desOlate, fi%ouriShing establish
ments perish. public aud individual
debts increased"
Who said this? What Imagination
drew these grewSome pictures of i'm
pending ruin? Was it Reed or Mckinley
or Burrows? 1t might have been. so
like their talk is it. When was it said?
In congress this year. on the stump last
fall? 1t might have been. But it wasn't.
1t was said forty-eight years ago. The
brief debauch of the protectionists that
began with the election of that other
Harrison had ended in the restoration
of a Democratic administration, pledged,
as this II o is. to a reduction of
taxes 20 the wants of the government
instead of to the wants Of the manu-
factursrs. The McKinleyism of 1912
was to be replaced by the Wilson'S m of
1916. The Walker bill was pending. 1t
had passed the house and was under
debate i'll the senate. The speaker we
quote was Reyerdy johnson.
The bill became a law. Not one of
these predictions was fulfilled. For
eleven years the bill remained unaI-
tered. Business. left to itself, divorced
from politics, dissolved from partner
ship with the government, prospered so
as to strike the attention and command
the favorable notice of Blaine, the his
torian. In 1857 a house which had
chosen Nathaniel p. Banks for its
speaker passed a bill, with the support
Of almost the entire Republican contin-
gent. reducing the bill 10 per cent be :
cause it afforded a surplus of revenue.
The Reverdy Johnsons of today are as
busy in their predictions of disaster as
they were then. They outhowI the
Populists. They tell the same old dis
counted stories which our fathers heard
In '46, and the same tlmorous, credulous
element now, as then, listen to these
prophets of disaster with the same
open-mouthed gullibility, and re-echo
their ~cacophonous croakings with the
same simian imitativeness that their
forbears did then. And we venture
the safe prediction that Republican
congressman within ten years will be
Unfin1 for flrfhar radnofinnC oE fho
Wilson act, and the little calamity
echoes of today will then be shouting
pRans to their craftsmanship.