St. Paul daily globe., 1896-03-24


! that that would be the result of the
| Democratic movement, Joined it to give
1T control Just as unquestionably it was
| the desertion of this element, disgusted
with the action of congress, that
| brought defeat in 1894, Independent of
the effects of the panic.
No man in the Republican party had
| the instructive sense of the drift of
! popular opinion in so high a degree as
had Mr.. Blaine. He was a leader be-
| cause he sensed, before others caught
them, the slight surface indications
that showed whittier the deeper, silent
undercurrents of opinion were flowing
Blaine saw and correctly weighed the
| strength of this free trade element in
his party, developing under the infiu-
ence of Cleveland's message of 1887.
Protectionist as he was, he saw that
it's detection meant defeat and that
something must be done to placate it..
The defiant declaration of the conven-
ton of 1888 of purpose to wipe out
the entire internal revenue rather than
abate one jot or little of the policy of
protection, he saw had aggravated the
free trade sentiment in his party. So,
while the enthusiasts under the lead of
Mckinley were driving their ultra
measure through the house, Blaine
| brought all his influence to bear in
the senate to compel a recognition of
the free trade principle in his reciproc-
ity scheme. That scene in the senate
appropriation committees room, when
Blaine snapped his fingers in the face
| of Allison and Hale and declared that,
were he in the senate, he would STAMP
! it the Mckinley bilD under my feet
and spit on it," and bade them ''go on
with your driveling idiocy and see to
what destruction it will drive the Re
publican party. ending with his smash
| ing his silk hat with blow of his fist,
| showed how keenly he appreciated the
| force of the free traders of his party.
1t is no secret that Mckinley and
Reed were bitterly opposed to the ad-
mission of the reciprocity features of
the bill. They saw clearly that it was a
contradiction in terms to add to bill
whose purpose was to restrict imports
a provision that would increase them;
| to reject foreign trade, and in the
| same breath, to invite it; to raise trade
obstructions with one hand and lower
them with the other. But Blaine tri-
umphed and reciprocal trade, which,
in its last analysis and condition, is
free trade, was embodied with restrict
| ed trade in the same act. 1t became
| the only defensible part of the act
around which the Republicans could
rally in the fierce assault on it that
Immediately followed. But it was in
| sufficient to hold the free trade ele-
ment; and, as ingalls, said, ''the most
magnificent party that ever existed
went to the most overwhelming de-
feat any party ever experienced"
Side by side now with the mad cur
rent that is carrying Mckinley and
his "drivelling idiocy'' to triumph in
the national convention, there is run
| ming strong counter current toward
reciprocity. A subcommittee of the
| house committee on ways and means
is receiving replies to it's inquiries
sent out to the manufacturers for their
views on reciprocity, and from all
sources come unqualified approval of
| and demard for it. In spite of it's
contradiction of protectionism, the ma
tional platform will embody it in it's
declared policies. But it and McKin-
leyism are as irreconcilable as oil and
water. They are what chemists call
| incompatibles. Reciprocity is an ad-
| mission that trade is essentially recip-
rocal; that we cannot sell abroad un-
less we buy abroad; that tariffs re-
strict exchanges and injure trade; that
| exchanges increase as tariffs decrease
| that if we shut imports out we will
! shut exports in and that free trade
| is the best trade. But Republican rec
iprocity can never be anything else but
the fraudulent, inconsequential affair
| that it was in 1890 and the years fol-
| lowing, because, simply, it cannot be
made effective without undermining
and destroying protection.