matter how injurious these demands might be to Massachusetts industries. Against these demands went forth the indignant protests of our industries, declaring that such a policy would be injurious to them and to the welfare of our Commonwealth. Where were Massachusetts' sons in that struggle? Her Democratic representatives were listening to her appeal and fighting for free raw materials to build up her industries. Her Republican representatives were bending the knee to Ohio and Pennsylvania, and, deaf to her protests, gave their aid to let her burdens remain, or to make them heavier still. I charged them then from every stump in Massachusetts, as I charge them now, with being recreant to her interests, and yielding for partisan purposes to demands from other sections that were hostile to the welfare of our State. I said Massachusetts had an accounting to make with them; and hardly were the words spoken when Massachusetts made her accounting, and, with emphatic voice, declared that not those who denounced this policy, but those who were responsible for it, were the sons who had been disloyal to her. I have no fear of trying this question over again in Massachusetts, nor shall my voice be hushed by the unjust and silly criticism that he who points out the injurious effects to his Commonwealth of an economic policy is maligning her name and interests. Malign my old Commonwealth, where I was born and have passed my life, whose glorious public schools have given to me an education, whose people have confided to me a high and honorable trust, whose brilliant history and sturdy virtues, whose great institutions and blessed charities I have praised from a hundred platforms, and to whose service I have given the utmost of my strength and ability? My friends, there is some criticism that cuts to the heart, and yet is almost too contemptible to answer.

SPEECH

AT LYNN, OCT. 29, 1891. STATE ISSUES. -THE TARIFF IN ITS RELATION TO THE LEATHER INDUSTRY.

IT

T is a little late now to discuss the issues of the campaign, but it is not too late to sum them up, and to show you what sort of a campaign the Republicans have been waging. They started long ago with a search for a candidate and an advertisement for issues. They demanded peace between their jealous leaders, and harmony among their warring factions, and called upon all their forces to rally under the name "Republican," however little that name might now mean to them.

They demanded an aggressive candidate, but nominated one who has declined to meet his opponent in fair and manly debate, and who absolutely refuses to define his position, or to declare any conviction on the great questions of State policy over which he asks the people to give him a controlling influence.

In his speech last night at Worcester, Mr. Allen remarked to his audience: "You and I have alike reason to rejoice that this campaign is so near its end. You, because, having performed the political duties enjoined on American citizens, you will be free to pursue your usual business and employment undisturbed by politics; I, because the exacting requirements nowadays imposed upon a candidate will be at an end.” Mr. Allen, your duty is not over, nor have you ever begun it. There is time left to do it, and this platform

and to-morrow night, when you speak here, are the time and place for it. You owe a duty to the people of the Commonwealth. You come before them as the candidate of a great party, seeking election to a bigh and responsible office. Your first and obvious duty is to declare to them your views on the great questions of the day in which they are vitally interested. That duty you cannot escape, except by evasion or silence. Let me tell you our people recognize and will tolerate. differences of opinion; but they will not tolerate the absence of all opinion, and they condemn a lack of courage or conviction in any political leader.

I propose to-night, as I have done repeatedly, to point out to you this obvious duty by demanding your attention to some matters upon which you have failed to express an opinion.

First, there has been an attempt, Mr. Allen, by the leader of your party, supported by four-fifths of it in the Legislature, to gerrymander the State in the congressional districts. That attempt thus far has been defeated. Your leader has refused, however, to repudiate his purpose. The present law is within the control of the Legislature and the Governor of next year, and can be repealed or amended to carry out his purpose. Do you, Mr. Allen, repudiate that purpose? Will you agree, if elected, to veto any attempt to change that law; or do you stand, with Mr. Lodge and four-fifths of your party, in favor of gerrymandering this State?

Second, there is before the people a great constitutional amendment to abolish the poll-tax as a qualification for voting, and to give to our people the great blessing of free manhood suffrage. Mr. Beard said last night: "It has been favored by Republican governors and Republican leaders all the way down."

I know that ever since the birth of the Republican party the Democratic party has demanded the abolition of this tax, but that in this it has always been defeated by the Republican party. I know that the justice of our demand has been recognized and admitted over and over again by Republican leaders like Sumner, Wilson, Dana, Boutwell, and Banks, and by many of its leaders of to-day; but our demand has always failed because the Republican party feared, when it ceased to tax the right to vote, that its power in Massachusetts was ended.

I know that your party has refused this year to declare its position upon this question. I know that upon every opportunity you had, Mr. Allen, you voted against the abolition of this tax, yet, notwithstanding your opposition, this amendment is now before the people. I demand, in their name, to know your present position. Are you still in favor of this tax qualification, and opposed to its abolition, or have you changed your mind? If you have changed your mind, why have you not announced the fact? Is it conversion under the stress of a losing campaign? If even at this late day you will declare in favor of its abolition, we can probably secure this desirable result. Your first duty to the people is to state your position.

Third. Your party professes to believe in temperance, and yet refuses to declare specifically its position. We know it has been on all sides of that question. We know that upon a platform which means nothing, and is meant to mean nothing, it has nominated this year one who will say nothing, but who has voted both for and against a prohibitory law, and later even found a third position on the question, -a straddle where, on a tie vote on the passage of such a law, he refused to vote at all.

I do not believe in a prohibitory law. Do you, Mr. Allen? Will you, if elected, recommend or approve a prohibitory law? Do you or do you not believe in the legislation of this year on the liquor question? Would you recommend or approve of the repeal of such legislation? Would you recommend or approve putting back the public-bar clause in the statute? Are you with the majority or the minority of your party on this question? Do you believe that a standing drink is a sin, and a sitting drink salvation?

I demand, in the name of the people of the Commonwealth, whose votes you are seeking, that you declare your position on all of these questions. An eager and unsatisfied public will get from you an answer, or go to the polls with a knowledge that you have not the courage to answer.

Fourth, there is, Mr. Allen, here in this, as in other communities of Massachusetts, a large body of our fellow-citizens vitally interested in the enactment of wise, just, and conservative laws to promote the interests of the masses of our people, and to elevate the cause of labor. You have had an opportunity to act in the Legislature on many of these laws. You have opposed and voted against weekly and fortnightly payment Acts, against the Employers' Liability Act, against free text-books for our public schools, and against other such measures. Many of these, notwithstanding your opposition, have since become laws, recognized and upheld by all as wise and just, and in the interests of our people. Are you still of the opinion that these laws are unwise? Does your unbroken record of opposition to them correctly define your position to-day towards legislation of this character?

Fifth, there is and has been, Mr. Allen, for many years a demand of the people that elections should be