The Minneapolis journal., 1902-08-02
WHERE HAY STANDS
He Comes Out Squarely in Answer
to Morris. '.~
ROOSEVELT RIGHT, HE THINKS
Before an Interested Audience Mr..
Hay Replies to Morris-Dis-
agrees With Fletcher.

Eugene G. Hay spoke in the eighth
ward last night in reply to the Tuesday
evening address of Congressman Page
Morris Of Duluth. The hall of the Eighth
Ward Swedish Republican association was
we'll filed, and Mr. Hay kept the audience
wide awake with his address. 1t was
mainly devoted to analyzing the course OF
the Minnesota delegation in congress. Mr..
Hay stood squarely with the president
and reciprocity, as against the insurgents
and the rebate plan. He also reaftirmed
his previous utterances for tariff revision.
In opening, Mr.. Hay said that up to
date he had had greater monopoly OF
the discussion of public questions than he
would like. The other candidates had
been leaving the discussion to him The
question occurred to him. WHO all am l
running against?"-to use the Kentucky
phrase. congressman Stevens, Tawney
and Morris had appeared in Minneapolis
already to explain the views OF the Min
nesota delegation, which did not entirely
accord with his own. He began to think
he was running against the entire dole
cation.
Mr.. Hay corrected a statement in one
OF the newspapers, which said that ne
agreed with Mr.. Fletcher on most ques-
tions. He said he disagreed with Mr..
Fletcher on all the vital issues Of the
campaign.
Fletcher Against Canal.
Referring to the Panama canal question,
he said Mr.. Fletcher's explanation did not
explain. The speech which Mr.. Fletcher
quoted from was delivered in favor OF a
motion to post pone the whole question.
Mr.. Hay repeated his assertion that MIR.
Fletcher had never been in favor Of an
isthmian canal. In support Of this he
read a written statement by G. H. Slack.
-hn SaiI hat ho nod wi
Mr.. Fletcher last November. Mr.. Fletch-
er said that he was opposed to the canal,
that 1t would involve expenditure OF
5000, 900 900, and that, though nine-tent hs
Of his constituents favored the canal on
general principles, he would have to vote
against 1t.
Mr. Hay then turned his attention TO
Judge Morris and his explanation Of the
insurgent attitude. Judge Morris, he
said, declared that he spoke for the dele
cation, and therefore for Mr.. Fletcher.
A Radical Difference.
Judge Morris maintained that the Diff
ference was only one Of method. On the
contrary, said Mr.. Hay, the delegation In
sisted on a rebate plan while the presi-
dent asked for reciprocity. The delega-
tion was from first to last opposed to
reciprocity.
Judge Morris showed the animus Of the
his strong argument on the proposition
that We did not owe anything to Cuba and
Cuba did not need relief
Mr.. Hay read from President Roose-
velt's message, declaring against the re-
bate and for a reduction, which. he main
tained would hurt no American industry.
In this message, also, the president de-
clared there was an obligation to Cuba
and need there for relief. This message
was written to urge the passage Of the
Payne reciprocity bill, which the delega-
tion voted against.
"Fourteen Reasons" Discussed.
The fourteen reasons presented by
Judge Morris in favor Of the rebate plan
were discussed one by one. as follows:
''First-It will afford relief both to the gov
ernment and to the people of Cuba
It would afford no relief to the people O.
Cuba unless the Cuban government fl
to give that relief, and that, OF course, woult
be in the nature Of sonne kind of a gratuity
from the government to the people.
"Second-It makes certain that Cuba AM
her people. and no one else, will be the bene
dciares Of our action
This was equally certain by the plan Of tn
ways and means bill. In fact, more certain
for the reason that under Judge Morris pial
the Cuban government primarily gets tn
benefit, and by the other plan the peop
get it.
"Third-By its adoption keep faith witt
the people of this country and with the peo
pie Of Cuba
In a broad sense do not keep faith witt
the people Of Cuba by this plan
We promised them commercial concessions
instead We give gratuity to the Cuban gov
ernment; the government and not the peopI
is benefited, and that benefit is of doubtful
value, II not a positive injury. 1t Is doubt
full if any nation or any people can receiv
a gratuity or a bounty without forfetting Q
impairing their independence.
'Fourth-It does not violate our nations
party platforms Of 1896 and 1900"
This is true; but neither did the reciproc
ty bill as it came from the committee.
"Fifth-It does not disturb existing cond
tions in this country
Neither does the bill Of the committee
''sixth-1t does not alter or modify an
schedule Of the present tariff law
I not afraid to alter modify th
schedules Of the present tariff law. That la
Is not to me a sacred thing I think man
Of these schedules need altering and modif,
Ing, and I am. in favor of many nodifc,