CHAPTER XV. UNSEATED BY DEMOCRATIC HOUSE- HORIZONTAL TARIFF REFORM DEFEATED. Democratic Landslide of 1882 - Grover Cleveland Comes to the Front - McKinley in his Old District - McKinley's Opponent Elected by only Eight Votes - Judge Folger Thinks them a Good Many - Carlisle Elected Speaker -McKinley's Opponent Contests his Seat The Morrison Bill for Horizontal Tariff Reduction- McKinley Shows up its Inconsistencies and Absurdities Calls it the Invention of Indolence and the Mechanism of the Botch Workman They Toil not Neither do they - Prediction Regarding Tariff 66 Spin "The "Carlisle Shape T HE Democrats of Ohio having observed that the previous gerrymander by which McKinley had been thrown into a strong Democratic district had only resulted in a larger success for the increasingly popular protectionist, passed another act by which he was again placed in his old district. But it will be remembered that the elections of 1882 constituted a landslide in favor of the Democrats. Grover Cleveland was brought into notice by his phenomenal majority of over 192,000 for Governor of New York over Judge Folger, a result due to the intense quarrel between the Stalwarts and Half-breeds in the Republican ranks of that State. The Republicans also of Pennsylvania lost the head of their ticket after an exciting campaign, the Democrats electing Governor Pattison. Besides this, McKinley was seeking a third term, and some of the old leaders in the original district had not forgotten. the ease with which, six years before, the young attorney of Canton had stepped to the front, and set them all aside. To be in politics in Ohio, it is almost impossible to avoid becoming involved in home wrangles. Perhaps little is lost by them in the end for they continually excite a large degree of interest in public affairs, promote active partisanship, and produce strong men. There was some strong opposition to McKinley's nomination, but his sincerity of purpose, his rapid advancement in Congress, the strong friends he had made there, his devotion to duty, as well as his many popular qualities, easily gained him the support of a large majority of the Republicans of his district for the nomination, and though a good deal of dissatisfaction was caused in circles which should have been loyal to him under all circumstances, he was elected, but by the narrow majority of eight votes. His Democratic opponent, Jonathan II. Wallace, promptly filed a contest. towns votes had been cast bearing other names than his, which Wallace claimed were intended for him. The contest was a notable one, and engaged the attention of the committee on elections for very nearly the whole session of Congress. Meanwhile Major McKinley kept his seat, and was one of the most active and useful members. In some A story is told concerning a visit which McKinley paid to Judge Folger at the Treasury Department soon after the election. Folger, as we have said, had been buried under a majority of 192,000 votes. McKinley mentioned. the fact that his majority was only eight votes. you "Young man," said Secretary Folger, "let me tell that eight votes is a mighty big Republican majority this fall." 66 The Forty-eighth Congress convened December 3, 1883, and John G. Carlisle was chosen Speaker of the House by 190 votes to 113 for J. Warren Keifer. Morrison of Illinois, chairman of the Ways and Means committee, two months later introduced his horizontal" tariff bill. McKinley had already become the active and leading man of the Ways and Means committee on the Republican side. Judge William D. Kelley of Pennsylvania, who had long been the guardian of the protective tariff, and who was the senior Republican member of the Ways and Means committee, was becoming an old man, and recognizing in McKinley the natural leader for the protective cause in the future, generously cast his mantle upon him, and that year, as on subsequent years, McKinley performed the hard work for the Republican side, preparing the minority report on the Morrison bill. He also took the brunt of debate against the bill, and his forcible exhibition of the incongruities and inconsistencies of the measure was largely instrumental in its rejection later. In the debate on the Tariff Commission bill of 1883, the Democrats had sought to fasten upon the Republican majority the charge of being incompetent to frame a tariff bill of their own, and so for that reason had abrogated a constitutional duty, and had farmed out the work to an expert commission. But when two years later Morrison brought in this same commission bill with a proposition for a horizontal reduction of twenty per cent. all around, with the added provision that the reduction should not operate to reduce the duty below the rate at which any article was dutiable under the tariff act of 1861, commonly called the Morrill tariff, and in no case should cotton goods pay a higher rate of duty than forty per cent. ad valorem, and wools and woolens a higher rate than sixty per cent. ad valorem, and metals a higher rate than fifty per cent. ad valorem, McKinley had a rare opportunity, which he fully improved, to vent his fine sarcasm on the subject of the Democratic capacity for revenue legislation. In the course of his speech he demonstrated by facts and figures that the measure, if it became a law, would involve dispute and contention upon nearly every invoice, and would lead to frequent, expensive, and annoying litigation. Articles would pay an ad valorem rate under one act, and a specific or compound rate under the other. He cited 118 classes of this kind. He said it would be almost impossible to ascertain the dutiable rate where the descriptions of classifications were so different, and showing already that wonderful familiarity with the various schedules, he took them up, one after the other, challenging the advocates of the bill to sit down and make calculations upon the articles he had named, and give their dutiable rates. He pointed out how, in some cases, the least variation in the price of goods in the same invoice would require classifications under different tariff regula tions. Then he turned upon the Democratic side of the House and said: "And all these absurdities, complications, and incongruities, a majority of this House are asked to solemnly enact into public law, which the people of this country are asked to submit to, because there are gentlemen who are unwilling to sit down and carefully mature a discriminating tariff act. The advocates of this bill criticized the Republicans of the last Congress because they created a tariff commission, asserting that such action was a confession of the incapacity of a majority of the Committee on Ways and Means to revise the tariff. By reason of incapacity, as they declared, the committee farmed out' the subject to a commission of nine experts. Much opprobrium was sought to be put upon the majority because of its alleged abrogation of a constitutional duty. What can be said of the capacity of the majority of the Committee on Ways and Means as evidenced by the bill now before us? It is a confession upon its face of absolute incapacity to grapple with the great subject. [Laughter and applause on the Republican side.] The Morrison bill will never be suspected of having passed the scrutiny of intelligent experts like the Tariff Commission. This is a revision of the cross-cut process. It gives no evidences of the expert's skill. It is the invention of indolence; I will not say of ignorance, for the gentlemen of the majority of the Committee on Ways and Means are competent to prepare a tariff bill. I repeat, it is not only the invention of indolence, but it is the mechanism of a botch workman. A thousand times better refer the question to an intelligent commission which will study the subject in its relation to the revenues and industries of the country than to submit to a bill like this. They have determined upon doing something, no matter how mischievous, that looks to the reduction of import duties; and doing it, too, in spite of the fact that not a single request has come either from the great producing or great consuming classes of the United States for any change in the direction proposed. With the power in their hands, they have determined to put |