The evening times., 1900-02-19
MONDAY. FEBRUARY 1s, 1900.
Mr.. Mckinley and the Open Door.

Mr. Mckinley and the Open Door.
When we had the pleasure of reading
the McKinley-Nels interview for the
first time the thought occurred that>it was
more than likely to render the interviewer
famous if not comfortable. and We are con-
WINGED Of il now since within twenty-four
hours Of its publication Mr.. Nelson has felt
obliged to explain that one of the most
important opinions amounting to definite
International policy which he put into tbs
mouth of the President was in fact mere
" his own view. Mr. Mckinley holding one
quite contrary.
Now. of course. this is quite proper, and
almost equally refreshing. 1t means that
oil the expressions credited TO Mr.. McKin-
lev. in the interview which may strike q
popular chord. are his sure enough; but
that all which may excite horror or resent
ment have been improperly ascribed TO
him aud are only the less highminded
ideas Of Henry Loomis Nelson, TO whom
Uur sympathies are due for verify he has
digged pi, and projected himself into the
cavity
The point and purpose of explanation
end denial Number One first series1. is TO
relieve President Mckinley of the impres-
sion created by Mr.. Nelson's clear and con-
else statement that he is unalterably op-
posed to the open door" in the Philip
pines as that policy would enable foreign
nations TO compete with the infant indus
tries of the United States in supplying the
archipelago with necessaries convenienceS.
and luXuries of life. What Mr. Nelson
apparently gathered from his conversa-
tion with the President was that the Ad-
miuistration intended to put 'protective"
taIin on imports from the Philippines sufii-
cieut to satisfy the sugar, tobacco, hemp.
and rum interests OF the American States
and a prohbitive tariff on imports into
the Philippines, except as to American
mainland productions, which should be
free or practically So in order to give a
monopoly of the island consumption to our
patriotic and struggling producers of oil,
whisky. -four, bacon. furniture, the metals
aud so on.
A position so paradoXical would nat
urally make even a Republican Admins
tration blush and wriggle. II has not lost
minute in performing those acts Of
modification for the public benefit. Mr.
Nelson hastens TO give earnest assurance
that Mr. Mckinley and his Administrs-
tion have been unconsciously misrepre-
sented that he and his Cabinet are heart
and soul for the open door" in the Phil
ippines How could they be otherwise
when they are demanding the same thing
in China with all the vigor of an aston
ishng Anglo American diplomacy. . DOW
erful feet, and blood in their eye?
The same question has occurred TO US
and doubtless, to many million Ameri
cans 1t would be a little sinuous. viewed
from the ground OF good faith and equity,
for the Administration and its cohorts in
Congress. which. we must not forget are
absolutely under its control and the con-
troll of the trusts and monopolies. to de-
mand free trade with the territories
under European protection in China and
exclude their productions from our Far
East. Mr.. Mckinley would scorn such an
attitude. So would Mr.. Hay. Mr.. Gage
would consider it worse than a Congress
ional investigation. and Griggs would not
know what to think about it until he
should hear from headquarters.
Unfortunately these patriotic and Tious
men have wicked partners whom Mr.. Mel
son describes as the Republican party. and
he says that it WIS to this malign influ-
ence he referred: 4 was expressing my
own opinion that the party and its domi-
nant influence, the protected interests,
would not permit the open door policy TO
prevail in the Philippines for the reasons
| gaye-reasons which are preventing Con-
gress from following the Presidents ad-
vice to grant free trade to Porto Rico
Thus, the real situation as regards the
attitude Of the Administration toward cur
new possessions is at last clearly defined
through the McKinley-Nelson interview,
amended next day TO cover a slight over
sight. Mr.. Mckinley is personally in fa-
vor of the open door in Porto Rico
and the Philippines, because he knows that
policy TO be the only legal one under the
Constitution. and that when the Supreme
Court has had d chance to speak on the
s@bject it will have to prevail. But his
Administration is willing to promote a
different view in Congress, in order that
the protected interests may not be Offend
ed and refuse TO pour golden eagles into
the bottomless hole of the Republican
campaign fund of 1900 We are at a loss
10 know which to be the sorrier for, Mr..
Nelson, or Mr. Mckinley.