Democratic Sentinel, Volume 20, Number 13, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 3 April 1896 — FAT IS NOW FRYING. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

FAT IS NOW FRYING.

SENATOR CHANDLER REPEATS HIS CHARGE. In a Letter to a Washington Paper He Asserts that Mone/ la Being Collected by McKinley’s Managers— Unjust to the Other Candidates. Explains the “Fat Frying.’’ When rogues fall out they are apt to toll the truth about each other. The Republican rascals who are laying plans to capture the Government so that they can again enact high tariff laws in the interest of trusts and monopolies are just now quarreling among themselves over the nomination for President. Major McKinley is so far in the lead of all the other candidates that the friends of the latter have become angry and boldly assert that the Ohio man’s friends are using large sums of money to buy the delegates to the national conventiou. Among other eminent Republicans who charge McKinley’s friends with making a boodle campaign for the nomination is Senator Chandler, of New Hampshire, who says: “I was very cautious in speaking about McKinley, but it certainly does seem to me that he is in the hands of unscrupulous managers. They say that this year the Republicans can elect a yellow dog if we nominated one. At the same time look at the situation. If McKinley is nominated we shall have to meet the charge that we fried the fat out of the manufacturers in the last campaign, that he fried the fat out of them again to secure his nomination, that he is continuing to fry the fat to buy his election, and as a result he will pay bis political debts with a high-tariff framed solely in the interests of the manufacturers. “With such charges as these to meet on the stump, the campaign on the part of the Republicans will be defensive instead of offensive.” In a letter addressed to the editor of a Washington paper Senator Chandler explains some of the statements he

made in the interview concerning McKinley’s canvass. Mr. Chandler declares he did not intend to cast any slur upon McKinley personally, but beyond that the Senator does not retract a word of his statement. In fact, he reiterates it with an attention to the circumstantial details of the fat-fryers’ work which was lacking in the original interview. The latter is as follows: The interview with ine on March 10 has led to much misrepresentation of its terms. I said nothing unkind of Mr. McKinley personally, but called attention to certain methods of some of his managers and protested against their adoption. The substanee of the charge made by me was that the same men who had assisted in raising the money to pay Mr. McKinley’s debts were calling upon the owners of protected industries to make contributions to help nominate him for President. Although the charge has been denied by Gen. Grosvenor and others, a review of the subject confirms my conviction that it is true. As bearing upon the question whether the collection and the use of the funds are for reasonaDle and legitimate expenditures I add that the fund which it was planned to raise was to be $250,000, a sum which could not be needed except for illegitimate purposes. In view of the effort to raise this large fund from protected interests my points were very simple and clear. Such a movement is unfair and unjust toward the other candidates, in whose behalf it is certain'no such large sums of money are being raised or used. Messrs. Reed, Morton, Quay, Cullom, Allison, Davis and Mauderson are as devoted friends of protection as Air. McKinley is, and the triumph of any one of themnvould be as sure a guaranty of the enactment of judicious and effective tariff laws as would be the victory of Air. McKinley. For manufacturers to contribute large sums of money to be expended in nominating Air. AlcKinley over any other candidate hitherto named would be a most unjust and uncalled-for proceeding. The interests of the Republican party will be seriously injured by demanding and receiving such large contributions from the representatives of protected interests. It has been a continuous cause of attack by the opponents of protection—the belief that the system has been maintained, Republican victories achieved and particular tariff schedules secured' from Congress by the money of manufacturers. Whatever may be said in justification of reasonable contributions from sueh interests toward the expenses of presidential and congressional elections after the nominations are made, a system of using money to control Republican nominations for office would be scandalous in the highest degree and fatal to all attempts to maintain the purity and honesty of the party organization. If to the natural popularity and strength of Air. AlcKinley Alessrs. Osborne and Hanna are to continue to add the expenditure in improper ways of large sums of money collected by them from the owners of industries protected by the tariff, thoughtful Republicans will do well to consider the consequences of a nomination thus made; the character of the canvass which is to ensue, the possible defeat which, even with the bright prospects before us, may come if we rush headlong into any egregious blander, and the controversies which, even if we are successful, are to follow such an admission of the standing charge of our opponents, that gross venality and corruption attend the maintenance of a high tariff system by the Republican party, which charge we have hitherto truthfully denied. I The Republican party is about to be returned, if it acts wisely, to overwhelming political power in this country. The party should begin its new career sustained by high principles and free from corrupt practices. It will be a fatal mistake, soon to be grievously punished, if we make a dishonest start. W. E. CHANDLER. When a Republican Senator admits that the candidate of his party will be forced to answer charges that he

bought his nomination with “fat” fried out of protected interests, to be repaid with high tariff favors, it should be ! easy for the Democrats to win on a platform of principles versus corruption funds. A High Tariff Clown. Congressman J. P. DoUlver of lowa is ambitious to wrest from ex-Congress-man Roswell G. Horr of Michigan the distinction of being the biggest buffoon on the high tariff stump, in the lowa Republican State convention he repeated some of his stale Congressional jokes, which the assembled Republicans were polite enough to laugh at. Then ceasing to jest he proceeded to record his “most solomn conviction that the only way out of the present condition of misfortune was to give back to the workingman of the United States the opportunity to do all the work of the American people.” This time his hearers did not laugh. They were probably too much depressed at the terrible thought that through the designs of the bold, bad Mr. Wilson and his Democratic associates, the American hired man was having his work done for him by some obliging foreigner. The condition of misfortune which had followed the repeal of the AlcKinley law, owing to the willingness of other people to do all our work, had probably never before been realized. But when Dolliver, orator, wit and statesman, unlimbered his jaw and told how the American people wort? suffering because they did not have to work so hard as when they had more taxes to pay, it all became as clear as mud. The lowa looked at each other and whispered, “Ain’t he great?” And he is great. A man who can look over this broad land and see armies of workingmen who are idle because foreigners are willing to give us goods for nothing, and understand at once that the way to change things is to allow the American people to do their own work, must be a genins. Of course there will be some carping critics who will say that as long as they get things made abroad without paying for them, the American people would be foolish to want to work. And the same critics will say that as a matter of fact our workingmen are even now busy in the mines, mills, or on the farms, producing things to send abroad in exchange for what we import. But Dolliver knows better. He knows that since the AVilson law went in force all our work, including that of building houses, digging wells and inventing protection arguments, has been done by European labor. If the lowa farmers have not noticed that their ploughing has been done by foreign paupers, it is probably because they have not been observant. If they think that it would be a mighty good thing if somebody would do their work for them, they are mistaken. They should do all their own work, except thinking on the tariff question. Dolliver will do that for them.

It is well to know just what to expect in case the Republicans are returned to power this year. So long as there was a likelihood that the American people would continue to have their washing and other work done abroad, it was useless to look forward to a return to the happy conditions which prevailed in 1893. But when it becomes certain that the workingmen of the United States will be allowed to do all the work of the American people, such as growing tea and coffee, or gathering elephants’ tusks, then the prosperity of the McKinley panic years will be assured.—-Exchange. Our Best Customer. The bureau of statistics on the commerce and navigation of the United States has just issued an annual report which contains some instructive figures. Of our entire exports the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland purchased just 47.94 per cent; Germany a little over 10 per cent.; France something over 5 per cent., the Netherlands 4 per cent., the whole of South America a little over 4 per cent. In the matter of imports one-fifth of what we purchase comes from the United Kingdom; Germany takes about the same quantity from us that we taka from her, while as between France and this count o’ the balance of trade is in favor of France. Thus it will be seen that free trade England takes from us nearly half of our exports and we take from her just one-fifth of our imports. Protection countries like Germany and France consume very little over in the one instance one-tenth and in the other instance one-fifth of what we sell. The reason that our exports to these countries are so small is to be found in the fact that they have placed a duty on American foods. While the working men of Paris were starving a short time ago, meat was prohibited from the shores of this nation by prohibitive duty. The Agrarian party in Germany succeeded In. having a tax put upon American corh. If the importation of English products were as free as the exportation of our products is to England, then there is little doubt that our export trade to that country would show a marked Increase. The figures quoted should cause the protectionist, not less than the jhlgoist, to pause.—St. Louis Republic. Do They Know What Is Good for Them? The theory of protection rests on the supposition that if the people were not restrained by tariff laws they would buy things to their disadvantage. Acting on this idea, the hightariffitesproeeed to prohibit trade which private individuals find profitable, and justify their action by the pretense that unless they were “protected” the consumers would be fooled by the sellers of cheap foreign products. If it were true that the people could not be trusted to look out for their own interests when buying goods, it would still remain to be proved that a protectionist Congress would be any wiser. If the majority are fools in business matters which directly concern themselves, how can they elect all-wise representatives and what reason is there for believing that a few hundred politicians know more about the value and quality of goods than the practical business men who handle them? Any one who believes that the people are capable of self-government must acknowledge that they know enough to buy and sell to their best advantage. Any other view is suited only to a despotism or paternalism In which the few rule the many.

W. E. CHANDLER.