St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-01-11
IRIS NArIONAL AsPECT.

The senatorial contest now waging
| between Senator Washburn and Gov.
| Nelson is not restricted in the signif-
J lcance of Its outcome 10 the state. but
| has a national bearing as we'll. This
! should not be lost sight of, as its impor-
! taEcc will become more apparent as the
| contest proceeds to its climax. Mlnne-
| sofa Republicans must not think that
| they are the sole parties having an in
terest, or that the result will be con-
| fined to the limits of the state and the
| fortunes of the state party. 1t Will be
felt beyond the state, and project itself
into the national campaign of '96.
Gov. Nelson was representative in
| congress when, in 1889. the Mills bill
was pending Prior to that for some
years his party in this state had been
tending strongly towards a revenue
| tariff, if not free trade policy. Its con-
ventionS had been adopting resolutions
stronger than those adopted by many
Democratic conventions. Four Mime
sofa Republican representatives had set
the pace by voting against the motion
to cut off the head of the Morrison bill.
| How Mr.. Nelson would vote on the
Mills bill was unknown to his colleagues.
Neither side was sure of him. The Re-
publican steering committee used every
artfice to get him committed to them.
but in vain He voted for the bill, aud
supported it in a speech that made him
famous over the nation, and one that,
him in the senate long before this and
| taken the state out of the Republican
| column.
Senator Washburn was in the senate
when the Mckinley act was under con-
sideration, and voted Loyalty i'll its sup
port on every proposition to amend it in
| the direction of reduction. or the
orthodox he was OF the strlctest sect.
| Never maker Of speeches, not even a
| phraSe-maker, he was not voluble in
singing the praises of that act as was
| his colleague, but i'll the few campaign
, speeches he has since made he has not
recanted his opinions as expressed in his
vote, but has adhered to that policy Of
| his party and defended and sustained it,.
Thus much by way of preliminaries.
| The elections of 80 and of '92 had all
effect which has not been entirely re-
| moved by the election of '94 Imme
| diatelv after the latter, in fact preced-
| ing it, it became apparent that there was
| a serious division OF opinion in the Re-
publican party. During the campaign
! Mr.. Reed argued that the country was
| tired of tariff agitation and wanted to
rest, and that it was necessary to take
| the house from the Democrats to pre-
vent them supplementing the senate
| bill with further reductions. During
the campaign, too. another element was
| singing the praises or protection and
! pointing to the panic as the direct result
! of the slight impairment that policy had
received in the senate bill.
| After the campaign this became more
and more pronounced, until the line OF
cleavage ran clear through the party.
dividing it into what we have hereto
| fore termed in discussing this phase the
Reactionists. who opposed return to
| McKinleyism, and the Restorationists,
| who assumed that the sole significance
Of the election was a reversal OF the
yerdicts of 80 and '92, and a demand
for the reha0iiment of the Mckinley
act in its entirety. The bitter warfare
waged by the Chicago Tribune and
Inter Ocean hut epltomized the condi.
ton in the national party. 1t shapes
| the discussions as to the candidates in
'9G, and the party is dividing eff into
the adherents of Mr.. Reed. represent
ing the Reactionists, and Mr.. Mckinley,
heading the RestorationiSts.
These two wings are watching the
struggle in Minnesota for the senator
ship with intense interest. Their in
terest will not be restrained to simply
watching. Leaders i'll each division
will feel like lending hand. On the
one hand. the powerful protected in
terests, they who have furnished the
fat for national campaigns, and who
mourn the diminution of privilege
made by the senate bill and long for the
return of favor, look askance at the
Little Norwegian" who played them
false five years ago, and are naturally
solicitouS for the return Of the loyal and
orthodox Mr.. Washburn. On the othe
hand, the followers of Mr.. Reed remem
Der the same incident in the career OF
the governor, and recognize that iii the
coming struggle between the two di
verse elements of the party Mr.. Nelson
if senator, would side with them. anC
are disposed to regard his candidacy
with favor and give it aid.
But before the opportunity will come
for the contest between the Reactionist:
and Restorationists in congress there
will come a national convention il
which the two wings will contest for the
mastery. Unless death intervenes, it il
now as certain as anything in the game
OF politics can be that, in that conven
ton, Mr.. Reed will be pitted agalns
MI. Mckinley, and the support eithe
will have will be because Of the party
policy each stands for. Both of these
| gentlemen came to this state during thu
campaign and made their bid for the del
egation in '96. Each of them has hi
strong adherents here. To them and t
their following in the nation the cleo
ton OF either Mr.. Washburn or Gov
Nelson will be taken as indicating tn
shade of color of the Minnesota delega
ton in the next presidential convention
Should Mr.. Washburn be chosen, it will
indicate thatNir. Mckinley Will have tn
delegation. Should Mr.. Nelson b.
chosen, it will be assumed that the stat
party prefers Mr.. Reed. Thus it is tn
contest spreads beyond the state.
WHY THESE TEARS?
There should be a prompt cessation