The daily morning journal and courier., 1897-10-29
SHERMAN TO OHIO VOTERS
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PENDING
 CAMPAIGN IN THAT STATE.

CAMPAIGN IN THAT STATE. Question is, Shall the Mckinley Adminis- l tration be Supported?-Same Issue Now | as Last November-Gold and Silver Wherein the Advocates of Free Coinage Err-Will Go Home to Vote.
 Washington, Oct 2S.-For the first time since the beginning of the present campaign in Ohio, Secretary Sherman has published his views in the shape of the following letter addressed to the editor of the Cincinnati Commercial Tribune, dated October 26.
 t'Mr. L. Markbreit, Cincinnati:
 My Dear sir-Your note of the 2sd inst, in which you request my view of the coming election in Ohio and in Hamilton county is received I have carefully observed the progress of the canvass with increasing interest as it has advanced and can hardly express in language my appropriation of it's i'm portance.
 My chief regret is that could not pot personally participate in it as by a usage carefully observed from the days of Jefferson to this time, the sec retary of state is precluded from ac- lively sharing in political discussion other than on foreign affairs.
 ''I look upon the pending canvass in Ohio as a re-trial of the issues involved 41,1 o1o 1F +a4 any, do not seem to be the subject of debate. Naturally the first issue now is whether the administration of William Mckinley thus far is approved by the people of Ohio. Upon this question there ought not to be any difference of opinion. His prompt calling togeth- CT the congress of the United States to provide requisite revenue for the SUD- port of the government and his recom- mendation of the prompt repeal of the feeble tariff law known as the Wilson, German law has met with general ap- proval. The revival of all industries and the commencement of prosperity in all parts of the United States was the natural and necessary result of the action of the president and republican congress
 9'The tariff laws have been the sub- ject of discussion in the days of Wash ington to the days of Mckinley. From the time entered congress in 1855 to this hour, I have at every election heard both in and out of congress of the respective merits of a revenue tariff and a protective tariff and upon these questions the two great parties have taken opposite sides. The Merrill tariff passed in 1861 is the text of the policy of protection to our American indus tries and though greatly changed from time to time to meet new conditions, it still forms the ground work of the policy of the republican party in re- spect to the tariff
 '"This act was passed at a period of development with light taxes and in- creasing population. The average yearly expense of the national govern ment from 1S40 to 1S60 including the ex- penses of the Mexican war, were about fifty million dollars. The civil war changed all this. Its cost has been stated as over six thousand million dol lars. To meet this enormous demand, the duties on imported goods were greatly increased and internal taxes in almost every form were levied on domestic products and upon the income of individuals and corporations. The ascertained national debt at the close of the war was $2,740,00O, ,0OO, but this was greatly enlarged by claims after ward presented and by the most liberal pensions ever provided by law.
 "In the face of these obligations, the expenditures, the interests of the debt and every year from 1866 to 1893, a por- tion of the principal of the public debt was paid, thus reducing it to $961, ,431, ,766 on the first of July, 1893.
 s'In 1890 congress passed what is known as the Mckinley tariff act,which was careful revision of all existing revenue laws. It largely reduced inter- nal taxes and carefully revised the tariff laws then in force If it had re- nnained on the statute book to this time the policy of protection and debt pay- ing would have largely reduced the public debt and prevented the severe stringency that followed it's repeal
 .sIt is the declared purpose of the re- publican party to restore and maintain the policy embodied in the Mckinley tariff act and the recent tariff act known as the Dingley tariff. It is un- fortunate but the beneficial provisions of the. latter act cannot be in full oper- ation for year or more owing to the excessive importations under the Will son act, but I confidently believe that within a year, under the present law, the revenue of the government will be ample to pay not only current eXpendi-