The Greencastle Democrat, Greencastle, Putnam County, 4 August 1894 — Page 3
The '•kies and clouds that float in space, Firat light, ’.hen shade our way. When looking for the narrow paths That lead to endless day. Along the way toward Heaven.
^emetimes our feet are hedged about With briars, thorns anil weeds; Sometimes the road is smoothly laid With helpful words and deeds. Along the way toward Heaven.
Up hill, at times, and down, in turn, From vale to mountain height. We often pass, with heavy hearts, And oft with burdens light. Along the way toward Heaven.
We watch and wait, w ith measured paoe, And mingled hopes and fears; We Joy ami sorrow, sing and sigh. We weep and dry our tears. Along the way toward Heaven.
Oh' tolling man. if the race with thee He well and wisely run. The battles boldly, bravely fought. The end will be well, life's sun Going down at the gate of Heaven. —Clark W. Bryan, in Good Housekeeping.
A SPELLING MATCH.
"Why Grandfather Wag Awarded the Leather Medal.
66/
H.” I learned a brand new word to-day, such a funny one, ‘‘cried Joe, looking' up from his school books to the members of the family who were gathered around the sitting-r o o m
table.
“Did you?’’
said Aunt Clara. “What was it? Can you spell it
correctly?”
wliut I mean.
“Of course, that’s 8-y-z-y-g-y, syzygy. ”
Clarence looked from his book and asked: “Do you know the definition of that wonderful word?" “Yes, it's in our astronomy. ‘The point of an orbit, as of the moon or a planet, of which it is in conjunction or
opposition.’”
“I know a lugger word than that,” put in cousin Will. "Oh! I didn't mean it was so large, but unusual.” said Joe. “Just think, the letters are all long but the first, and I suppose we could write a long one if we wanted to.” “What is your word. Will?*’ some one
asked.
“Kndecaphyllous. It is a botanical word. It means, having eleven leaf-
lets.”
“What spellers our boys are getting to be,” laughingly remarked Aunt Clara. “Nell, you are going to let them get ahead of you? What wonderful word can you spell?” “Nothing. We can't all be talented, you know, auntie. But I did hear bench spelled in a very- unusual .way at the entertainment the other evening— b-e-eneh, bench.” “That reminds me of the way in which we spelled potato when we were girls,” mother remarked to Aunt Ciara. "Don't you remember?—put-one-o, put-two-o, put-three-o, put-four-0, put-flve-o, put-six-o, put-soven-o, put-eight-o.” "Yes, and Constantinople, too,” was the reply. “It was very silly, but all the children said it in our day. C-o-n a kizi con, a constanti, and a t upon a nople, and a Constantinople.” The boys roared. “Well, that was a way to spell,” laughed Clarence. “But not so queer as the way in which every school child reads preface,” observed Nell. “No, I suppose not. When I was in school 1 really thought that preface meant ‘Peter Ililey eats fish and catches cels,’ and then backwards: ‘Eels catch alligators, fish eat raw potatoes.’ I wonder who made up that nonsense anyway." Presently Clarence exclaimed: “Say, wouldn’t it be fun to have a spelling match here to-morrow evening, just among ourselves, you know. We can each look for a long word, and see who can find the longest.” “All right,” assented Will, “I suppose we can find them anywhere, in any paper or book?” “Yes, if they have been printed," returned Aunt Clara, who was always ready to help the girls and boys will:
GHANDFATliEK LISTENED QITETLY. their play as well as with their work, “we will accept them.” Grandfather, who was sitting by the fire, had been listening quietly to the Conversation. Now he seemed to be chuckling to himself over something, and when one of the folks remarked that none of them could expect to get ahead of Clarence on words, he smiled harder than before. But none of them noticed it. Grandfather was supposed to be asleep, and, therefore, not interested in wlmt was going on. The next evening it was apparent to the older members of the family that Will, Nell and Clarence had each found a very long and unusual word. They said nothing, but they looked important, and after father had spelled "chronogrammaUcal,” the longest word he could find during a very busy day, and mother ha l given them "iso-
thermobathie,” and Aunt Clara “sj-n-clinorium,” Nell spelled her word, it wa-. this: “S-e-n-i-c-a-t-e-g-o-r-i-c-a-1- m - a -1 - !• c-a-1, senicategorelalinatieal.” "Ami you really found that in print'.’” asked father. "Yes,” was the reply; “it was said to be the name of a pudding in a downtown restaurant.” Then it was Will's turn. He spelled: “T-r-a-n-s-m-a-g-n-i-f-i-c-a-b-a-n-d-a - n - j-u-a-l-i-t-y, transmagniticahandunjuality.” “The meaning, sir?” demanded Aunt Clara. “I found it at the head of a circular. I presume it meant take notice, or something of that kind.” Clarence seemed eager to begin. lie was sure he had the longest word. He had found it in a newspaper, and it was the name of a man, or supposed to be. Here it is: “II-a-n-s-v-o-n-d-e-r-n-i-c-k-e-l-e-r-v-o-n-f-u-s-s-e-n-g-z-i-l-i-c-a-n-h-a-u - s - e - n, 1 Ians vonderuiekeler von fustengzilicanhausen.” There was a hearty applause when Clarence had finished, and Aunt Clara, going to a closet, brought out a very large medal with the words, “Champion Speller,” printed on it. Just as she was about to hang it on the boy's neck, grandfather surprised them all by crying out: “Look here, you haven't given mo my chance. Don't you know I used to be the boss speller of the west? There was one word that few of them could get around their tongues, or get their tongues around, 1 should say. I believe I remember it yet. Would you like to hear that?” "Of course,” they all exclaimed. "Haven’t any objection to compound words, I suppose?” “No, not if they have been in print,” said mother. * “Well, then, this is all right. It’s been in western papers more times than I can count. Now, here it is, and I always spell it before I pronounce it. That is, 1 pronounce each syllable alone as I spell it.” They all settled down, grandfather cleared his throat and then started in: “A is an a; b-o-m bom, is a bom, is an nbom; 1 is an i, is abomi, is an abomi; n-a na is a na, is an ina, is a bomiua, is an abotnina; b-l-e ble is a ble, is a nable, is an inable, is a bominable, is an abominable; b-u-in bum is a bum, is a blebuin, is a nablebuin, is an inablebum, is a bominablebum, is an abominablebum; b-l-e ble is a ble, is a bumble, is a blebumble, is a
SUE WAS ABOUT TO 1IANO IT OX THE boy's NECK.
nablebuin ble, is an inablebumble, is a bominablebutnble, is an abominablebumble; b-e-e bee is a bee, is a blebee, is a bumblebee, is a blebumblebee, is a nahlebuinblebee, is an inablebumblebee, is a bominablebutnblebee, is an abominablebumblebee; w-i-t-h with is a with, is a beewith, is a blebeewith, is a bum blebeewith, is a blebumblebeewith, is a nablebumblebeewith, is an inablebumblebeewith, is a bominable bumblebee with, is an abomInablebumblebeewith; i-t-s its is an its, is a withits, is a beewithlts, is a blebeewithits, is a bumblebeewithits, is a blebumblebeewithits, is a nablebumbleewithits, is an inablebumblebeewithits, is a bominablebumblebeewithits is an abominablebumblebeewithits; t-a-i-1 tail is a tail, is an itstail, is a withitstai), is a beewithltstail, is a blebeewithitstail isabutnblebeewithitstail, is a blebumblebcewithitstail is a nabumblebee withits tail, is an inablebumblebeewitbitstail, is a bominablebeewithitstail, is an abominablebumblebeewithitstail; c-u-t is a cut, is a tail cut, is an itstaileut, is a withitstailcut, is a beewithitstailcut, is a blebeewithitstailcut, is a bumblebeewithitstailcut, is a blebumblebeewithitstailcnt, is a nablehumbleewithitstailcut, is nu inablehumhlcbeewithitstailcut, is an a bominablebumblebee withitstailcut, is an aborainabiebumblebeewithitstailcut; o-f-f off is an off, is a cutoff, is a tailcutoff, is an itstailcutoff, is a withitstailcutoff, is a beewithitstaileutoff, is a blebeewithitstailcutof, is a bumblebeewithitstailcutoff, is a blebumblebeewithitstailcutoff, is a nablebumblebeewithitstailcutoff, is an inablebumblebeewithitstailcutoff, is a bominablebumblebcewithitstailentoff, is an abominable - bumble - bee-with-its-tail-eut-off.” I presume it it hardly necessary to mention that amid shouts of laughter grandfather was awarded the leather medal.—S. Jennie Smith, in American Agriculturist.
Simp Judgmentf*. Only a fool fishes with a gold hook. Custom is oftentimes an ignoramus grown old. “Love me little, love me long,” and remind mo of it occasionally.^ "Put yourself in his place,” but don't expect to stay there forever. To kick the man who kicks i - our dog is no satisfaction to the dog. There are many good women who make bad wives, and vice versa.— Madeline Orvis, in Judge.
—"John,” said the poet's wife, “another of your poems has appeared.” “Hell?” he replied. “Oh, nothing; only I was thinking how well ‘sonnet’ rhymes with new bonnet.’ " "Yes, that's so; and so does ‘stanza’ rhyme with ‘bonanza,’ but it ain’t one by a whole lot.' 1 —ludiauapolis Journal.
Why the TtirifT 3i<‘form lliis Not Itecn Brought About. The democratic party is not in power at the national capital. It cannot control legislation in congress. It is helpless to pass an important and vital measure, which was promised in the democratic platform of and which by an enormous majority the people demanded at the ballot box. The plighted faith of the democratic party stands unredeemed. It has been powerless to f"lfill its pledges. The work which it was appointed to do—which declared should be done—has not been done. One year and four months ago a democratic president was sworn into oflice, and the term of a national congress began with a nominal democratic majority in both the senate and the house. There was no such majority. Eight or nine senators elected as democrats have acted in alliance with the republicans. They have not cast a democratic vote on the tariff bill. They have voted just as McKinley would have voted had he been in the senate. It is an error to say that the democrats are in power while a faction of senators classed ns such—enough in number to destroy the democratic majority in the senate—arc casting republican votes, conspiring with republican leaders to defeat the democratic tariff bill and are in open insurrection against the democratic sentiment of the country. The president and the house of representatives are united in a determination that the demociatic pledges of ISSCJ shall be kept in good faith with the people. They have presented a tariff bill which was the best that the necessities of the ease would authorize—not perfect, but a long step in advance-a measure of practical reform. The senate refused to accept this measure. Under republican control— by a majority composed of the regular corrupt republican forces and a guerrilla contingent of bogus democrats— the democratic tariff bill appears destined to defeat If anything shall be saved, it will be merely what the house and the president can extort from a hostile, undemocratic senate. The coal senators, the iron ore senators, the sugar senators and the collars and cuffs senator have repudiated democracy, repudiated the platform of 1802, repudiated tiie popular instructions adopted at the ballot box, and arc determined to force on the country a tariff dictated by trust deed, by the monopoly combine and by and by the republicans, or they will prevent the passage of any tariff bill. These recalcitrants and renegades are not democrats. They are republicans, bearing a false name and carrying false colors. These senators misrepresented their states, the democratic constituncies of the country and the body of the people. They are a bushwhacking detachment of the party of trusts, monopoly, protection and organized fraud. They have betrayed the country. They have been false to the duty which they were instructed to perform. If these false democrats shall be successful now in defeating reform tariff legislation the result will not be chargeable to the democratic party of the nation. It will be simply another republican victory—a victory of the party of trusts, monopolies, class legislation, of corporate greed and extortion, reenforced by a group of sordid and faithless politicians who have violated party allegiance and ferfeited the name of democrats. This will be a calamity. But it will be no reason for giving up the fight. It will be a reason for lighting ‘die future battles of reform with increased vigor, courage and zeal. The people have been betrayed. But the cause is not lost. The contest will be continued. The faithless, tht> cowardly, the trimmers and the traitors will ho driven to the rear. This reverse will be retrieved. Better men will be clothed with the trust to which these recreants were untrue, and it will be discharged in the spirit of the instructions given by the voters to their representatives. — Chicago Herald.
THE CAUSE OF CONTENTION.
What tho Itrpuhllriuis ami AhhUimt Iteimlillcans Are StrlvluK For. “If the senate bill be not passed, the McKinley law will remain on the statute book,” declared Senator Vest, defiantly, speaking not for himself alone, but for many of his colleagues. And what are the special provisions of the senate bill whose acceptance the senate demands under threat of MeKinleyism as the only alternative? All the differences between the house and senate were found easy of adjustment by tho conference committee except as to sugar, coni and iron ore. The senate is prepared to defeat all tariff legislation unless it can get a differential duty on refined sugar, whiclt will benefit the sugar trust, and a tax on coal and iron, which certain senators demand as the price of their votes for the bill. The president of the sugar trust is quoted freely and without contradiction ns having declared, as long ago as 1888, that sugar can be refined in the United Slates at a cheaper labor cost than In England, France or Germany. Tho common republican defense of a protective duty, adopted by tho Gorman party in the senate, is that it must be enough to make up the difference between cheaper foreign labor and American labor. There is no such difference in thin case. Who foreigner lias already the best of it. The proposed tax is not for tho purpose of holding up American wages, but of swelling the profits of tho greatest trust that flourishes under our laws—a trust that pays enormous dividends and fears publicity so much that it is engaged iu desperately resisting the efforts of the state of Massachusetts to force it to comply with the law and make a.statement of its financial condition. Coal is an article whose price not only plays an important part in estimating the cost of living in every household, but figures largely in the cost of manufactured pr^ducta The
people are entitled to cheap coal. That a tax upon it is necessary for increasing the wages of coal miners is a pretense that no man can seriously urge. There will be a market for every bushel of coal mined, with or without a protective tax, and at prices that will justify reasonable wages to the miners. The recent coal strike disclosed the fact that the existing duty on coal was totally ignored in fixing wages of miners, whose wages had been needlessly cut to less than the tax imposed professedly for their benefit It has been our boast that we can produce iron cheaper than anj’country in the world. \Ve do not yet know how far we can go in reducing the cost of it A Birmingham firm lias recently turned out iron at six dollars and fifty cents a ton, and throughout the south and the northwest there are advantages in the location of beds of iron ore that no other country in the world possesses. The proposed taxes on refined sugar, iron ore and coal are bounties pure and simple. Yet the senate proposes to vote them or to make the country put up with the. McKinley bill.—Louisville CourierJournal.
THE SUGAR TAX.
Why tho Hopubllran* Stick So t loiioly to tho McKinley Hill. It is obvious that the alluring shibboleth, “a free breakfast table,” is the influencing cause of much of the opposition to the sugar tax in tho pending tariff bill. There is a fascination in tho idea that the essential elements of the poor man's matutinal meal shall be exempt from all elements that might add to its cost, and there is a more or less widely diffused delusion that under the present law sugar is free front taxation. But, as a matter of fact, it is taxed to an extent without parallel, Tho two cents a pound bounty to the growers of raw sugar and the fivetenths of a cent tariff on all the products of tho sugar trust combine to create an enormous levy, and, though it is collected on the clothing and blankets of the people, and is presented bodily to tho beneficiaries, does not in the least degree alter the facts in the case. It is a tax just the same, and a tax that is criminal because it is au unconstitutional robbery. The plain truth of tho matter is that because of republican profligacy and the inefficiency of the McKinley bill as a revenue law. the country is confronted by an impending treasury deficiency. To avoid such a calamitj' it is necessary to discover new sources of revenue. With that idea in view, tho pending bill provides for withdrawing the unconstitutional gratuity to the sugar growers aud the sugar trust and divert an equal amouut of the money that is taken from the pockets of the people into tho treasury. Tho bounty to the sugar growers will amount this year to about 825,000,000. The “protection” to tho trust is 820,000,000, making a total of 8-15,000,000 of taxation ou sugar, comparatively little of which goes into the treasury. The pending bill will draw about an equal amount from tho people, but every cent of it except that which goes for expenses of collection will go into tho treasury and be available for tho ordinary expenses of the government, relieving the people of taxes on other necessaries to that amount. We would be glad if it were possible to secure this reform in the revenue system without affording protection to the sugar trust, but the democratic majority in the senate is so meager that tho defection of a single vote would put the whole measure in jeopardy. The sugar trust, like all other trusts, is obnoxious to the democratic party, and any legislation that would destroy it would bo welcome to the democratic people. But according to the best information attainable it is not possible to accomplish this result. One or two senators who hold title to their seats through democratic suffrage declare their intentions to bolt unless the odious concessions arc made to them. The consequence would bo the continuance of the McKinley bill, which is what the sugar trust and the republican party desires. The late Gov. Moses once said, by way of encouragement to his carpet-bag associates in the south: “There are a couple of years good stealing in the south yet.” It is an analogous sentiment that influences the republcans to adhere to tho McKinley bill with such marvelous tenacity.—Kansas City Times.
PARAGRAPHIC POINTERS.
Mr. Cleveland’s recommendations appear to us eminently wise and proper in tho present emergency. — Boston Herald. McKinley is the Eugene V. Debs of American politics, lie is the man who tied up the business of the country.—Kansas City Times. Debs' strike is the last misfortune of the republican panic of 18U8. We arc on the eve of an era of democatic prosperity.—St. Louis Republic. Chairman Wilson's health is still feeble, but it is gratifying to know that his weakness is not located in tho vicinity of his backbone.—Boston Herald. President Cleveland's letter to Chairman Wilson is manly and straightforward. The president says what he means and means what he says.—Buffalo Enquirer. People shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the national treasury was about ready to go into the hands of a receiver at the close of Benjamin Harrison’s administration.—Kansas City Times. President Cleveland's manly and straightforward letter to Congressman Wilson was made public at just tho right moment. The democracy of the nation is with honest Grover in this matter.—N. Y. Morning Journal. There is no doubt that Mr. ClevoInml represents the sentimentnf his party and tiie general sentiment or the country in his desire that the instructions upon which this congress was elected shall be faithfully carried out. —Philadelphia Times.
A TTomlt'rfiil HUrovvrod by a New Viirk Protectionist Orirsn. The ultra-protectionist New York Press is improving the present occasion by uttering wild ami silly calamity shrieks. It calls the half Hedged Wilson bill the “bill of anarchy” and credits it with all the numerous wage reductions, strikes and riots which have occurred under the McKinley bill rule during the past year. It says: “The difficulty out of which the disastrous conflict at Chicago has arisen was directly due to the war waged by Grover Cleveland and the free trade bourbons upon American industrial interests and the American standard of wages," It says "the tariff bill framed to enrich monopoly and to impoverish the northern working man has robbed hundreds of thousands of industrious wage earners of employment and forced them into the depths of destitution. It has closed a host of manufacturing establishments and compelled a sweeping reduction of pay in multitudes of others like Pullman.” It says “the detestable bill" contains “the seed of a hundred riots worse than that at Chicago," etc. It is perhaps useless to suggest to tlje Press: 1. That its great ami beloved McKinley bill guaranteeing high wages and steady employment to all is still in j force. Is this mighty bill unable to l cope with the mere shadow of the i Wilson bill? 2. That if the Wilson bill, which j splits McKinly diWies in two, is''framed 1 to enrich monopolies” for what purpose j was the McKinley bill framed? .5. That tiie reduction of wages at Pullman had little or no connection ! with the tariff discussion. Hundreds I of surplus cars having been manufactI ured to supply the needs of excursionI ists to the world's fair it was to be exI pccted that this would be a dull year at Pullman. 4. That it will not impoverish the northern or any other workingman to reduce his taxes and to provide more work for him by giving free raw materials to his employers. • 5. That it will not impoverish the northern farmer to give him cheaper clothing, food, shelter and tools and to open up better markets for his products, both at home and abroad. 0. That people who live in protected glass houses should not throw stones at those who are laying the foundation for a free trade house. It may tie recalled that a few strikes and riots, like those at Homestead and at the Cieur d’Alene mines, occurred before the detestlble Wilson bill cast its shadow across the McKinley bill. Also that a list of over 500 wage reductions in protected industries was published in 1892 as the result of the two years of MeKinleyism, and that wage advances were as scarce as hen’s teeth. In fact, it may be recalled that wage strikes and riots were unknown in tills country before the introduction of high protection about thirty years ago, which has given us monopolists, mortgages and tramps in proportions to make a most unstable mixture in a republic. TV That the McKinley bill was but the culminating act of republican and protectionist atrocity which lias for thirty years been breeding anarchy and discontent by legislating wealth out of the pockets of the hard-working masses into the pockets of the dishonest schemers who. by political jobbery and legislative bribery, control and operate our railroads and protected mines, forests and factories. The Press lias gotten the shoe on the wrong foot, it is a high monopoly tariff and not free trade that is largely responsible for the present anarchistic conditions.—Byron \V. Holt.
1 only about 1 per cent, during the seven : years from IMts to 1854. 2. Free wool and greatly reduced duties on woolens will be a lx>on to the ninety-nine out of 100 persons who have to consider prices when making purchases. Nor is it at all probable that free wool will injure the wool grower or the woolen manufacturer. It is quite certain to benefit the textile workers of this country by giving them steadier employment. Free wool will give new life to the woolen industry just as free hides, in 1872, gave new life to the leather dressing and leather consuming industries. Under protection the price tif wool has declined until. under the McKinley bill, we have reached a free trade basis and are selling our wools in Europe. The farmer, therefore, even if he be a wool grower, lias nothing to fear from free wool If he is not a wool grower he most certainly will lose nothing and will save perhaps 23 per cent, in what he pays for woolen goods. Our exports of woolen goods, which have already begun under ta.\c*t raw materials, may be expected to increase many fold with free materials. The Wool and Cotton Reporter, of July 5th, tells us that during the first week in June and the last week in May we exported to (treat Itritain carpets valued at £2,010 fsl3,'MS)). This is at tiie rate of over S-'IOO,-000 a year. W says that our export 1 trade in carpets has become firmly established and that one firm “of late , has alone shipped more carpets to I Great Itritain than the English and Scotch manufacturers combined have sent to the United States.” With free wool the demand for carpet weavers will surely increase. 3. Free lumber will protect the home industry of building homes. While the benefits will he hut slight in many parts of the United States, in some parts they will be considerable. All kinds of sawed, planed or grooved boards as well as shingles, laths, pickets, shooks, staves, etc., have been made free. The value of the dutiable imports of the wood schedule was over 813,000,000 in 1803. Under the proposed bill it would he less than 83,500,000. The saving of duties will Ismefit all, except the holders of timber lands, who arc usually rich speculators often with dishonestly acquired titles. If free lumber causes their land to decrease slightly in value it will still be worth, in many instances, several times what they paid for it. 4. Reduced duties on all manufactures and raw materials, except on sugar, will lower prices and stimulate industry. While these duties have not been reduced as much as was expected they will still lie light as compared with the heavy McKinley duties. 5. The adoption of a tax on incomes will do much to equalize the burdens of taxation. This tax will never rest upon tiie poor who pay 75 per cent, of our tariff and internal revenue taxes. It has come to stay until supplanted bv some better direct tax.—Byron W. Holt.
TARIFF REFORM GAINS.
Ad Vtilorrm Duties Free Wool Free 1.11 Illlie r—Lower Unties— Ineotne Tax. While it is too soon to estimate all of the prospective gains to tariff reform, it is not too soon to declare that the gains will be greater, rather than less, than in the senate bill which is now in conference. What, then, are some of the distinct gains certain to follow the passage of tile Wilson bill? 1. One of the greatest gains comes from the greater use of ad valorem instead of specific duties. It is not easy for those who have not given special attention to tho subject to realize the great difference between these two methods of collecting taxes. Specific duties collect as much taxes from the cheap goods of the poor as from the costly goods of tiie rich. A tax of 81 a yard may double tiie cost of an inferior suit of clothing, while it adds but onetenth to the cost of a first-class suit. If the first-class suit wears three times as long as the inferior suit, the poor man who wears the inferior suit will pay three times as much taxes as the rich man who wears the first-class suit. The injustice of specific duties is so great that it would make them intolerable if they were applied to direct taxes where their effects would he seen by all. Thus, a tax of 850 apiece on dwelling houses, which would bear lightly upon the palaces of our millionaires would make rebels and anarchists out of our millions of day laborers who live in houses that cost from 850 to 8500 each. It is not. however, because specific duties discriminate in favor of the rich that they are tiie rule in the McKinley bill. It is because they afford more certain and increasingly greater protection. Specific duties take no account of the nuturul decline in prices of goods. As prices fall the rate of protection increases. A duty of 850 per ton when steel rails are selling for 8100 gives only 50 per cent, protection. The same duty gives a protection of 200 per cent, when the price has declined to $25. The tendency of these duties to give increasing protection is demonstrated by tiie McKinley bill. In 1891 the average rate on dutiable imports was 40.28. In 1892 it had increased to 48.71. and in 1893 to 49.58. The tariff of 1883 behaved in the same way though it contained fewer specific duties. With ad valorem duties the rate of protection is practically stationary. Under the ad valorem Walker bill the rate varied
AN OBJECT LESSON.
Let Am erica n Protect ioniat* Kumcmhei httt Converted Sir Hubert Peel. The English newspapers speak of the proposed tariff in somewhat disrespectful tones, and we admit that, considered logically, it is not a meausure worthy of immense commendation. And yet many measures that have at the time of their creation been considered as seriously wanting in good points have, as time passed on, secured for themselves a respect which they did not primarily possess. The constitution of the United States was a compromise, giving satisfaction to few, if any, of those who framed it, who plainly announced that they accepted it, not as satisfactory,but as the result of hard necessity. And yet we have succeeded in living under our constitution, and some later day commentators have gone so far as to pronounce it a masterpiece of statesmanship. We would not have it inferred from this that we believe that the proposed tariff, which is essentially a compromise measure, and a compromise forced under hard necessity, will prove to be a species of legislation calling forth the admiration of succeeding generations; but what we can say in favor of the Wilson-Gorman-Jones-Fall River-sugar trust-sea-moss tariff is that it will serve its purpose in tiie necessary work of object teaching. We might point out to our English critics that it is as much of an advance toward freedom of trade as was made by the British tari ff reformersof 138:!, and it wu- the wonderful success of tiie English 1843 protective tariff that made a free trader of Sir Robert Feel and many other Englishmen who had previously been hide-bound protectionists.—Boston Herald.
Ought to He Gratlflml. The tax-dodgers and usurers and money hoarders, the corporations and the millionaires ought to feel very grateful to Senator Hill for his fight against the income tax. Of course the fight is a losing one; any fight led by Hill is bound to be. But in his zeal to defeat the income tux Hill has lost what few friends he ever had in the south and west. He has not only killed but damned himself politically. And for these sacrifices his owners ought to thank him.—Indianapolis Sentinel.
That Ancient Garment. The Tribune waves the ragged remnants of the mildewed bloody shirt in an attempt to excite sectional feeling against the tariff bill because a majority of the conference committees are from tiie southern states. This is pitiful partisanship. The people will not object to accepting reduced taxes and free raw materials even from men who were “rebel brigadiers” thirty years ago.—N. Y. World.
IIIII'* Folly. It is really very foolish for Mr. Hill, after the months of dawdling for which he is not responsible, to step in at the last moment and delay action when every one else is ready to act. This is what Hill is doing in his hopeless attempt to defeat the ineoin'' tax. He can accomplish nothing. He must know that lie can accomplish nothing. —Indianapolis News.
J