THE MCKINLEY TARIFF.

Wairoa Bell, Volume V, Issue 176, 16 December 1892, Page 6

THE MCKINLEY TARIFF.

A correspondent writing to the London ‘ Times ’ gives a short resume of a conversation he had with President Harrison in October 1891. The President began with the question, '“How did your constituents (Stockport) like the McKinley tariff? ” ‘ ‘Not at all,’ was my reply, “ but I doubt whether you, sir, will keep their manufactured goods out of America, for you have corn of the value of £100,000,000 to sell us, and certainly will not be paid for it in gold.” “Why not?” asked the president. “ Because,” I replied, “ we cannot spare it. It is doubtful whether we have so much gold in the country.” “ Then,” said he, “ I shall drive you into bimetalism, which I want to do.” “ But, if we do pay you in gold,” I asked, “ of what use will the gold be to you unless you spend it in productions or manufactures, which you do not possess?’ Mr Harrison replied that he considered it the chief commercial object of every country to hoard up as large a store of gold as possible in the national treasury. Respect for the President's position stopped the retort that rose to my lips—that in England old women like to do the same in a stocking. The president then asked me how, in my opinion, their corn would be paid for, and was evidently annoyed at the confident tone of my reply, “With eur goods,” and challenged me to prove it. I said, 1 Well sir, wishing to take to my people at home some choice presents from the United States, I have been to your best shops in New York and Wash ington, aud could find nothing suitable for the purpose except things made in England or France, and the storekeepers told me that they had no high class articles of American manufacture. “ The English goods are best,” said they ; “ our rich people will have them, whatever they have to pay, and they certainly have to pay as much again as we do.” “ Well,” said Mr Harrison, “ freetrade may be best for England, but protection is best for America,” “I am glad you think so, sir,” was my reply, “because, although if the United States were to abandon protection the trade between you and us would largely increase, yet you with your enormous ad-

vantages, would soon under-sell us in the neutral markets and drive us from them, whereas now we keep them to ourselves.” “Neutral markets,” said he, scoffingly, “ in savage places.”