At the end of half an hour a movement was made to silence him. But other debaters on the Republican side saw an advocate had arisen more powerful than they. They gave him their time and he went on. Friends of the bill tried to badger him with questions. But he met every thrust with a dignity which disarmed and a reply which silenced them.
And when William McKinley sat down, the Wood bill was defeated, and nothing like it was ever again offered in the American House of Representatives.
It was a significant part of his work that day—a characteristic of his labors through life—that results were felt in the future. From that day the free trade army was divided. The West, neither possessing considerable industries nor at the time appreciating their value, found itself divided from the East. From that day no great opponent of protection has come from the East to the halls of Congress. And—what is more to the point—no strong popular sentiment supporting free trade has flourished in the populous Atlantic states.
“A house divided against itself can not stand.” How then shall an army divided against itself hope to march victorious?
But “tariff reform” still looked good as an issue, and the opponents of protection continued their crusade against it. They could not believe they would be defeated. They insisted that three thousand miles of ocean was enough protection for the American manufacturer. They pointed out that the price of each protected article was increased to the American consumer by just the amount of the protection tax. They refused to see that the consumer would, under a national policy which should strengthen industries, be better able to pay the increased price than the lower price under free trade. They were short-sighted. And they were confident the masses of the people were as short-sighted as themselves, and would overwhelmingly sustain them.
So their clamor continued.
So the Republicans in 1882, advised and counselled by Congressman McKinley, provided for a tariff commission which should investigate the whole question and recommend legislation that should settle the national policy once and for all. The commission was appointed by President Arthur, but before it could report the tacit agreement was broken, and William R. Morrison, of Illinois, brought forward, in 1884, his remarkable bill for a 20 per cent “horizontal reduction” of the tariff. The house was again Democratic, but William McKinley, overcoming successive gerrymanders in Ohio, was still in the house, now advanced to a position of influence and importance; and no “horizontal reduction” could take place while he was there, no matter what the political complexion of the House might be. Against a hostile majority, he led the forces of protection’s friends. A part of his address on that occasion is as follows:
“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. The Morrison bill will never be suspected of having passed the scrutiny of intelligent experts like the Tariff Commission. This is a revision by the crosscut 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 question in its relations 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 the knife in, no matter where it cuts nor how much blood it draws. It is the volunteer surgeon, unbidden, insisting upon using the knife upon a body that is strong and healthy; needing only rest and release from the quack whose skill is limited to the horizontal amputation, and whose science is barren of either knowledge or discrimination. And then it is not to stop with one horizontal slash; it is to be followed by another and still another, until there is nothing left either of life or hope. And the doctrinaires will then have seen an exemplification of their pet science in the destruction of the great productive interests of the country, and “the starving poor,” as denominated by the majority, will be found without work, shelter or food. The sentiment of this country is against any such indiscriminate proposition. The petitions before the Ways and Means Committee from twenty to thirty States of this Union appeal to Congress to let the tariff rest where it is, in general, while others are equally importunate to have the duties on two or three classes of American products raised. The laboring men are unanimous against this bill. These appeals should not go unheeded. The farmers for whom you talk so eloquently, have not asked for it. There is no appeal from any American interest for this legislation.
“It is well, if this bill is to go into force, that on yesterday the other branch of Congress, the Senate, passed a Bankruptcy bill. It is a fitting corollary to the Morrison bill; it is a proper and a necessary companion. The Senate has done wisely, in anticipation of our action here, in providing legal means for settling with creditors, for wiping out balances, and rolling from the shoulders of our people the crushing burdens which this bill will impose.”