His life embraces the era of protection to American industry. As he was its most sagacious and successful champion, as he in his labors expressed that thought as the controlling motive in governmental policy, so his death falls in the year when a protective tariff is recognized on all hands as having accomplished its great and useful mission. And the passing of McKinley is the retiring-time of that issue which has, more than anything else, made a mighty nation on the western continent.
It may be fairly said that there was no protective tariff, as such, until the close of the war. Such efforts in that direction as had been made under the leadership of Henry Clay and the earlier theorists among statesmen never rose to the magnitude of impressing a national policy, for the reason that the country was not ripe for them. In that formative period which preceded the election of Lincoln, men might speculate and debate and prophesy about free trade and protection, but the Union as a nation was growing; and it needed the great issue no more than a boy of fifteen needs the book called “Every Man His Own Lawyer.” The nation was growing. It wanted farmers to broaden the plowland area, to lay the wide and deep foundation of agriculture, which must be the first step toward the construction of a great and permanent country.
Of course the Morrill tariff bill was not a measure of protection. It was a war measure. The question of economics was by no means necessary, and by no means invoked in that debate which preceded the enactment of the great tariff measure of 1861, or the supplementary bills which succeeded it in the process of raising revenue for the struggling nation. But when the war was over men of all parties and of every section were face to face with the greatest problem that has ever affected civil government.
The time had come when a burdened people demanded a reduction of taxes. It was no wonder. They had suffered grievously and with a splendid patriotic patience through four years of war; had paid the mighty demands of a government which needed the sacrifices of its people if it were to escape sacrifice itself, and now, in the relaxation which followed a disbandment of the armies, the public expected a lightening of their burdens.
The tendency of thoughtless men was to return to the free trade schedules of that formative period when the God of Destinies helped the farmer and bade the manufacturer “Wait!” There were few men wise enough to see the peril in that transition. Lot Morrill had said the tariff was a war measure, and it was. But free trade would have been a peace measure more disastrous than war. And Major William McKinley, returning from four years’ service for a nation worth saving, knew that protection was none the less the policy demanded by all the best interests of the nation, now no less than when the national expenses were millions a day.
It required a brave man to face the storm of protest against a policy of protection, and an able man to prove arguments for the fortifying of that position. But William McKinley was both brave and capable, and he was hardly home from the army when he was entangled in a debate with a freetrade resident of Poland. It was a public occasion, and the speakers were allowed half an hour each, with a board of judges to decide as to who had won the debate. No election or other observable political significance hung on the issue, but none the less it was a notable night, a stupendous incident in the life of William McKinley. He knew the nation needed a policy of protective tariff for the building up of an industrial empire on the broad and deep foundation of agriculture which three quarters of a century had laid. He knew that the time had come when the mills were important if the nation would grow strong—and that the mills could be summoned into existence only by the adoption of a policy of encouragement and fostering care.
So far as the decision of the judges was concerned, William McKinley lost the debate. Two of the three held to the untaught sentiment that free trade was holy and the tariff a curse. The third saw and apprehended the logic and the argument of Major McKinley; but he was outvoted, and the public decision was that a protective tariff was impolitic and unjust, and should be abandoned.
Probably no event in the life of this advancing young man is more important than that. Probably no night of his life is so crowded with national interest as was this when he gave his mature thought and the rare powers of his young manhood to the discussion of this great question. He could easily smile at the verdict in that little room, in that little Ohio town by two little men who are now dead and forgotten. For he knew that a greater verdict in a greater arena, by a nation that shall never die and be forgotten, would abundantly and triumphantly and gloriously sustain him.
And he worked harder after that, finding support for the position which he recognized as essentially right and wise. He had enjoyed debates in the old days of his boyhood, of his school and college experience; and now he felt the impulse of a national summons to service as sacred as that which led him into the career of a soldier. In the confusion which followed war, men of all parties and from every part of the nation, and of every degree of influence, were either openly declaring or tacitly confessing that the protective tariff must and would be repealed. There was an element wise as McKinley, which recognized the error of the doctrine, but there were very few as brave. And the result was that in the first ten years after the war a public sentiment was formed which led inevitably toward absolute free trade. And even twenty years after the war the courage of this strong young son of Ohio was so largely wanting in the public men of his party that they dodged the issue; that they continued to promise a reduction or a repeal; that they appointed by presidential act, authorized by congressional action a tariff commission which should devise ways and means for the reduction or obliteration of the protective tariff. It is small credit to those men to add that the general motive was delay—temporizing; that they felt the wisdom of retaining the protective feature, and hoped “something would happen” to convince the country without sacrificing the growing industries. Braver men would have faced the truth as William McKinley faced it, and have fought for a high protective policy as a matter of principle.
Meantime, he went to the Albany Law School; for he had resisted the temptation to adopt a military life, and had declined with thanks the offer of a commission in the regular army. And at the Albany Law School he studied with diligence, and fitted himself for the successful career at the bar, and for that wider career as an advocate in the court of the nation, toward which he had been unwaveringly moving from his earliest boyhood.