The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1897-03-24
Democrats and Mckinley.

The subjoined article, with the
above title, from the New York Sun,
is an answer, as effective as it is conclu-
sive, to current but very absurd and
disingenous criticism, by the Mugwump
as we'll as the Democratic press, of the
Republican purpose to enact tariff
measure like that proposed by Mr..
Dingley in behalf of the majority of
the committee on Ways and Means:
Our very serious and sincere eeighbor,
the New York Times, thus expresses It's dis
appointment touching the Dingley tariff
BILL
"If President McKinley's message and
Mr.. Dingley's tariff bill hadibeen put before
the people three days before the election Of
last November, they would have put the
sound.money cause and the honor OF the ma
ton in the gravest peril. The Democratic
votes which elected Mr.. Mckinley were won
and kept by false pretences.
That means that the Democrats who
voted for Mr.. Mckinley to ward off the
financial ruin which would have been in
volved in the election Of Mr.. Bryan would
not have done 80 II they had known that
they were voting for protection. They
would have preferred the free coinage Of
silver, and the consequent reputation, to
the protective tariff, and hence they are
swindled by the Dingley tariff bill, accord
| ing to the New York Times.
But how are they swindled2 The Rebuff
| lican platform adopted at the convention
which nominated Mr.. Mckinley, the very
embodiment Of the principle OF just such
protection as our good neighbor assails,
declared emphstically and unmistakably
in favor OF I" the policy of protection" and
denounced "the present Democratic tariff
as sectional, injurious to the public credit
and destructive to business enterprise" 1t
called for tariff that will not only fur
nish adequate revenue for the necessary ex.
penses of the Government, but will protect
American labor" How, then, could any
Democrat have voted for Mr.. Mckinley
under any misapprehension of the tariff
policy he was voting for? Where were the
"false pretences?" They would be shame
fully apparent if Mr.. Mckinley had not
lived up to the pledges Of the platform on
which he was elected, and without which
his election would have been impossible.
| II the Democrats hated protection more
than they feared free silver why did they
vote for him? They voted for him to save
themselves from financial ruin and the
credit of the government from infamous
destruction; and they have got their re-
ward. They helped to avert the catastrophe
which would have followed the election Of
Mr.. Bryan, prefering protection to ruin and
disgrace; and they accomplished their pur-
pose, which was both patriotic and selfish.
Why should they complain because Mr..
Mckinley is faithful to the policy Of which
he was the foremost representative, and to
the promises Of the party which nominated
him? They have no right to find fault when
that is brought about which, in voting for
him, they assisted in introducing.
In view of the disastrous results of
the tariff legislation which had the
votes and the advocacy of both Demo-
Gratis and Mugwumps, and the utter
failure of every prophecy ventured by
the supporters Of the policy of the late
national administration, in respect Of
the practical working of that legislation,
the proper attitude of those political
elements during the existing tariff dis
cussion is one of silent humility. The
country has no further use for them as
political guides or prophets.