The true Democrat. [volume] (Bayou Sara [La.]) 1892-1928, 1896-10-03
WILSON LAW A SUCCESS.
AMPLE FOR REVENUE AND PROTT(C-
TION TO LABOR.

McNinlcv's Letter Reviewed by John
DE Witt Warner, Il Member
of the Committee OF Congress
That Framed tho Wilson Fill.
Mr.. Mckinley begins the unfortuu
alto high.pcotectlou portion OF his lev
ter OF acceptance by claiming tuac in
December, 1892, under the tariff act
bearing lis name, the country was IN
condition OF extraordinary pros.
perity. lie cites from President har-
rison's message :he statement thut be-
tween October, 1890, aud October -,
1892, 345 additional industrial plants
had been established and los extern
sions had of existing plants, and that
during the first six months OF the cal
eudar year 1892, l35 new factories
| had been built. The facts were that
the two preceding years had been
those OF steadily increasing industrial
depression. Omitting all instances OF
labor troubles the cause o. which WAS
either doubtful or clearly other
wise to bs classified, there has been
coilated end published rs challenge
to protection lists, with date and place
and circumstances in eaca case, nearly
twelve hundred instances of wage re-
ductlons during those very two years,
with strikes against them or lockonts
by employers in order to force accept
auce. The number Of new plants and
factories and extensions Of such quoted
by him from President Harrison is so
petty, when the size Of this country
and the myr;ads OF its industries ere
taken into account, rs TO be but a
trihing Offset to the terrible record OF
OF disaster then daily being added to,
and in reality q humiliaving confession
OF the failure OF Mch,nley legislation
which has promised better things.
As proof Of Democratic depravity
Mr.. Mckinley then quotes from Presi-
dent Clevelauas messate OF August s,
1922 Il correctly characterized the
condition OF our country eight months
later, when It's condition, still under
Republican legislation, HAD reached
such crisis that Congress Yves called
together in midsummer to save our
finances fron RUN by the repeal of
the purchasing clause OF the Sherman
act, for which Mr.. Mckinley had voted
and which the party which now poses
RS u knight Grant OF sound finance
had vociferously pointed to with pride
in its platform OF q short year previ'
Gus. Tie abyss from which the action
Of tho Democratic Administration then
rescued the country was but the enc
Of the descent upon which it had been
started by the twin "protection' Sis
terS.
Mr.. Mckinley says taat from 1880
to 1892 we had "a protective tariff un-
der which ample revenues were col
lected for tbs Government aud an &C
cumulsting surplus." OF these years
he was responsible only for tvo-lS9i
to 1872 during which his law was i'll
operation. SO far from s surplus &C
cumulstinG under his bill the annual
surplus had fallen from Sl0G, 900, 90;
lin the year before the passage Of tht
Mckinley hllI) to S3iI, 0ao. 900 in thu
first year OF its operation, to $40. 900,
900 in the second year, and to s. 800,
900 in tue third year, and had turned
to o deficit of $50, 000, 00H in 1881. tht
last year before its repeat.
Sach is the decentralization OF o,1
finances, resulting from Republican
legislation, with which our commerce
and manufactures have struggled TO-
years; and Mr.. McNinley's figures -,
which, charging to tho Wilson bill tn
ruin caused by the Sherman act, h
strives to make the Mckinley bill
tolerable by comparison, are NO
merely unfair, but, when rightly read
the best proof that be is wrong. That
under all the circumstances, our ex
ports OF manufactured goods are So
nearly the maximum figure for on
most prosperous years; thct the be!
ance in our favor OF our foreign trad,
is SO large and SO rapidly growing
shows how much the Wilson bill ha
done to Offset the disaster bred by thu
Sherman act.
Mr.. Mckinley charges the Wilson
tariff with failure to raise rovenu.
sufficient to satisfy the needs Of Gov
eminent. What does he mean? Doe
he not believe that, even from a pro
tectionist standpoint, all interests o
business 1emanl thar III adjusting :
tariE it shoHid he So fixed as to remain
without substantial! change Tor a con
siderable period, say eight or tel
years? If this DO true, must he no
also admit that lSs rates should bs 81
adjusted, not in view Of the maximum
revenue probable under exceptions
prosperity or to the possible minimum
under an extraordinary depression
but to the probable average Of condi
tons during the entire term contem
plated? To adopt the latter measure
Mr.. Mckinley must admit, would b.
wantonly to overtax our, people On.
| daranuo fhnir tipnncou hy lcolriro ~,