IN FREE TRADE JAPAN
f;.
WHERE ABLE BODIED MEN EARN
06 CENTS A WEEK.
Ami Whfrw Women Hlnre for Twenty
Four Cents • Week — Labor la One of
the Minor Considerations In All Free
Trade Centers—In Amerlea the Chief.
The British minister tit Toklo, In an
interesting report reviewing the prog
ress of Japan in establishing home in
dustries, suggests that, at the present
rat* of progress, ‘‘the Japanese t will
after a time hold their own with their
instructors, anil without any assist
ance of a protective tariff shut im
porters out of their markets.” Wo oro
told that "since 1880 the amount of yarn
annually produced in Japan has in
creased nearly sevenfold. During this
period—from 1880 to 1800—the impor
tation of yarn increased steadily for a
time. Home consumption and demand
for export to Chinn encouraged the
supply up to 1888, when the imports
were nearly double those of two years
before. In IS'.K) the importations had
fatten off by one-third, while the home
production had steadily increased. It
is natural to suppose that this decline
in imports is immediately connected
with the growth of native manufact
Fnrthor on, however. Minister Fraser
lets in a flood of light on the secret of
Japuncse ability to eopc with the for
eign manufacturer. It is simply the
low rate of wages that prevails in
Japan. Minister Fraser describes as
the advantages enjoyed by the Japan
ese mill owner the fact .hat “he can
keep his machinery going through the
whole twenty-four hours, while he pays
In wages the low rates of eight pence
a day to men anil from two pence to
five pence to women. ’ ’ The equivalcn t
fn American money is sixteen cents a
day for men and from four to ten cents
a day for women. If the mill opera
tives in Japan work six days in the
week the women receive from twenty
four cents to sixty cents a week, and
the men receive ninety-six cents a
•week. *
It should be remembered that these
'figures are given in an official report
from the official British representative
in Japan to his'home government, anil
are no doubt the result of careful in
. ■qulry and accurate information. if
American manufacturers should pay
their employes the Japanese froo trade
wages of from twenty-four vents to
ninety-six cents a week there is no
doubt that they could get along with
out fear of British competition. But
American manufacturers have no desire
-to pay and American employes have no
•desire to receive the free trade wages
Sill,700, or about four to every hun
dred of name nge.
Eight in each hundred of those be
tween 00 and 05 years, or 05,880 in all.
are paupers.
Over 05 years, twenty-six out of
every hundred, or more than one in
four, depend on public charity, of
whom the total amounts to 313,002.
These are the estimates made by
lien, Booth of the Salvation army in
his recently issued book, “Pauperism,
A Picture.”
While strength and health last, the
sturdy Briton, as a rule, beurs up
somehow, no matter how low his
wages, against the burdens of his
miserable free trade existence.
Hut when old ago drawB near he is
forced to the poorhouse to end his
days.
Hero are (len. Booth’s own pathetic
comments on the sad facts ho sets,
forth:
“Old age fares hardly in our times,”
“Life runs more intensely than it
did, and the old tend to lie thrown
out.”
“The community gains by this, but
the old suffer.”
“They suffer beyond any measure of
actual incapacity, for the fact that a
man is old is often in itself enough to
debar him from obtaining work, and it
is in vain he makes pretense by dyeing
liis hair or wearing falso teeth.”
It will be a sad day for America
when we experience such conditions
here, as we surely would under free
trade.—American Economist.
Tlie Force BUI.
There are Republicans who are in
some doubt as to the kind of legislation
needed to secure an honest ballot in the
South and stop the prostitution of elec
tion laws and machinery in that sec
tion. They are ready to listen to any
honest argument or suggesstion in re.-»
gard to this matter, but it
may ns well be understood at
once that they will yield nothing
to the bullying spirit and insolent
falsehoods of the Democratic platform
in its denunciations of the “Force
bill.” “Plantation manners" have
been squelched in Congress and it is
about time the bullying insolence of
slavery should bo omitted from the
Democratic platforms. The ex-rebols
have suffered enough by this time to
know that the North is not to be
bullied and that no cause is to be
helped in this country by Democratic
curses and falsehoods.—National Bulle
tin.
Democrats Never Resign Anything.
Chairman Harrity will not resign
his office ns Secretary of the State of
Pennsylvania while running Mr. Cleve
land’s campaign. Chairman Harrity
holds the best paying office in the
State of Pennsylvania with one excep
tion, and is besides president of the
THE GREATEST ISSUE.
QUESTIONS FOR THE ENEMIES
OF AMERICAN PROTECTION.
It la on That Question That We Host
Stand or Full—Can any of Tour Demo
cratic Friends Give a Satisfactory
Answer to These Questions?
The American Economist occasion
ally asks a few questions. The lust
installment is as follows:
If free trade and slavory did not go
hand-in-hand, why was John C. Cal
houn a protectionest until he became
the representative of the Blave power?
If trusts are due to the tariff, what
was the cause of the anthracite coal
trust?
If the American laborers are so effi
cient that they do not need protection,
why do free traders doubt their ability
to make tin plate?
If Cleveland is not a demagogue, why
does he misrepresent the condition of
our country in order to gain a partisan
advantage?
If the Mills bill was not a sectional
measure, why did it leave the duties
on southern products unchanged while
abolishing or greatly reducing the
duties on the products of the north?
If the result of free trade is to'in
crease importation of competing
articles, why will it not correspond
ingly discourage their manufacture in
this country?
If invention is not stimulated by pro
tection, why did it always progress
more rapidly in protective than free
trade policy?
If free trade is productive of hard
times, why were there hard times in
every free trade era our country has
had?
If “cheapness” is desirable, why do
the people of other lands where
“cheapness” rules flock to this coun
try?
If protection is un-Democratie, why
was Jefferson a protectionist?
If it prevents us from exporting why
are our exports greater than ever be
fore? *
If free trade would benefit labor,
why were free traders from Adam
Smith to Bonamy Price and Perry all
opposed to shorter hours in a working
day?
If reciprocity is a “sham,” why is it
detested by Great Britain?
If “free raw materials" are the ne
cessity, why did free traders repeal the
duty on cotton ties and retain it on
hoop iron?
If wages are regulated by demand
for and supply of labor, how will the
destruction of American industries
raise them?
If mugwumps are not un-American,
pgcRS
( DEM.0
<y
Net ,n
WAGES OF- ”
#6,377,32.5*;
IN THE -YCAH /89id
/IS coiap^ep w/r/ys
TWE /jMOlWT p/j;p^
/890.
IN
«**?■
*rp - ,
If
" COMMISSIONER PECK’S REPORT.
GROVER AND HIS CAMPAIGN COMPATRIOT GET A TERRIBLE SHOCK FROM THEIR OWN CAMP,
l t ,
-ft V
/ . '•
&
&<!■
*?■ •
:+..
(;i:V
^either of Great Britain or Japan.
This report of Minister Fraser is of
great interest and importance for
another reason. At the present rate
of progress the twenty-four-cents-a
week factory labor of Japan will soon
. produce more than enough for tho Jap
' anese demand. Should the protective
tariff be broken down in the United
States the American market would be
most convenient and accessible for the
products of J apanese t wenty-four-cents
a-week labor, and the quick and intel
ligent Japanese would be sure not to
miss the opportunity. It should
mot be forgotten that European
competition is not the only com
petition against which it is necessary to
protect American industries. There is
a vast field of cheap labor in Asia that
is rapidly acquiring civilized arts and
that ia rapidly preparing to enter any
Western market that may be thrown
■open to the world. In Asia labor
counts as a minor expense in manu
facturing; herb, in America, it is the
principal expense.
Free trade would ultimately and
'logically mean the degradation of
American labor to the Asiatic level_
Hew York Press.
•U‘i
i
r
Iv
irt Tariff Sermon.
Free trade and poverty are Siamese
twins.
In free trade England there were
3,317,104 paupers, exclusive of lunatics
amd vagrants in the year 1890-91.
They included persons of all ages.
There were 315,437 under 10 years oi
.-age, or about three in every hundred oi
<t)M total population of similar age.
Between 16 and 69 years, there were
site
im
Equitable Trust company of Philadel
phia. Senator Quay, who once held
the same office, resigned it before un
dertaking the management of another
campaign. Chairman Carter promptly
resigned his office of commissioner of
the land office upon accepting the
chairmanship of the National Republi
can committee. Joseph it. Manley of
Maine resigned the postmastership at
Augusta. Maine, before even accepting
a position for the campaign on the na
tional executive committee.
“Free Trade” Defined.
Properly understood, the term “free
trade” means not the abolition of all
tariffs, but that import trade shall be
free of taxes levied to protect home in
dustry. Such taxes as imports can
easily bear and still monopolize the
American market are said to be im
posed for revenue only. Thus large,
revenues may be raised by taxing im
ports, and yet there will be a condt
tion of “free trade,” that is of trade
free from protective, defensive or dis
criminated taxes adjusted to benefit
[home industries.
I Free trade thus means simply trade
free from protective, but not from
revenue taxes. The Democratic de
mand is not to destroy the tariff alto
gether, but to adjust It so it will not j
protect home industries, but merely
raise revenue and not interfere with
the control of the American market by,
foreign manufacturers.
The conflict between free trade and
protection is irrepressible and must be
fought out to the bitter end. We spit
upon compromises, and propose neither
to ask nor to give quarter.—Henry Wat
teraon.
wlyr do they sneer at the American
flair?
If British workingmen were bene
fited by free trade, why did Cardinal
Manning’ speak of the “world of
wealth and the world of want,” as
typified in the condition of the Eng
lish peopled
If patriotism means love of conntry,
why is it not patriotic to support the
products and industries of one’s own
country before all others?
If the decline of American shipping
is not due to the want of protection,
why did it always advance until pro
tection was withdrawn?
If the Democrats are not reaffirming
the confederate constitution, why did
they make that document the pattern
for their free trade platform?
If the mission of thd United States is
to “produce cotton and wheat at low
prices,” how comes it that we are the
greatest of manufacturing nations?
Hoi mam.
Holman, the economist, is fairly
beaten by the record of expenditure of
Congress. He whines in extenuation
that the increase over the appropria
tions by the Fifty-first Congress are
due to legislation .by that Congress.
He means the pension legislation, nota
bly the dependent pension bill. But
no attempt has been made by the ■
Democratic House to repeal that legis
lation. They had not the courage. At
the same time it is safe to say that
there will be no future increase of ex
penditures made necessary by pension
legislation enacted by this Congress
Only native or naturalized citizens
are permitted to work on the streets of
New Bedford, Mass.
How the Son 111 llrrelved tbe Olive
Brandi of Pence Offered by (lie Peo
ple’* Parly.
Tba platform of the People’s party
contains this noble sentiment: "We
deelare that this republic can only en
dure As a free government while built
upon tho love of the whole people for
each other and for the nation; that it
cannot be pinned together by bayo
nets; that the civil war is over, and
that every passion and resentment
which grew out of it must die with it.
and that we must be in fact as we are
in name, one united brotherhood of
freemen.”
Upon this platform they nominated
an ex-Confederate general. Here was
an olive branch laden with luscious
fruit. With that in his hand General
Weaver, the presidential nominee,
went into tbe south to advocate his
party’s cause. Instead of being given
a respectful bearing he was mobbed.
Think of it. The preferred choice for
the presidency of the great party in
America, denied a hearing in this land
of free speech and freemen. Nor was
that all. The ladies of his party, his
wife and Mrs. Leese, the "Patriok
Henry in petticoats” assaulted with rot
ten eggs! And this in the land of
boasted chivalry! When Miss Winnie
Davis, tie “Daughter of the Confed
eracy” was in the north some years
ago, she every where received marked
courtesy. The only lady who declined
to receive her was Mrs. Cleveland.
W’hat a contrast. Jefferson Davis’
daughter showered with kindness;
Mrs. W'eaver showered with rotten
eggs. The Georgia delegation voted
solidly for Cleveland in the Chicago
convention.
The democratic party hopes to elect
Grover Cleveland, who was nomin
ated by the south, by throwing the
election into the house of representa
tives, which they hope to do by voting
themselves for the Weaver electors.
Will you aid them in this attempt?
Will the true men of the north become
the cat’s paw for the south?
The votbrs.of Nebraska who were
formerly republicans are earnestly re
quested to read the following state
ment before voting at the next election.
Admitting that you believe in the prin
ciples of the people's party, and in
the measures advanced by that party
to promote the general prosperity of
the nation and earnestly desire the
election of Weaver, how is it to be ac
complished? If Weaver and Field
were to carry all the following states,
although they do not claim more than
thirteen of them the result would be:
Aianama .n
Arkansas. 8
California. 9
Colorado.4
F.orida.. 4
Georgia.13
Idaho. 3
Iowa. . ..1,
North Carolina.11
Oregon . 4
South Dakota.4
Texas. :.15
Washing on. 4
nunsas.1)
Louisiuna. 8
Minnesota .0
Mississippi. 0
Missouri...17
Montana. 3
Nebraska. 8
Nevada. 3
North Dakota.n
south Carolina.9
rennessee.12
Virginia.12
Wyoming. 3
I Total, Accessary to choice, 223.
VVeaxer and Field would therefore
. still need 18 votes in the electoral col
| lege. But no one will now claim that
I the people’s party can carry ail of
j these 26 states. Weaver himself says
; he will carry 13 states. It is impos
sible to name thirteen states exclusive
of New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio
| which will give him a majority in the
j electoral college. The only resuit
! therefore possible for his candidacy is
| to throw the election into the house of
representatives which insures the elec
i tion of Grover Cleveland, who is op
posed to every plank in the people’s
party platform; is a gold bug. opposed
to the coinage of any silver whatever;
thinks reciprocity a •■sham”and is op
posed to free speech especially by the
speakers of the people's party.
The democrats-are seeking to elect
Cleveland by voting for Weaver elec
tors in a few northern states and
thereby throwing the election of pres
ident into the house of representa
tives, which is don6 when no candi
date has a majority in the electorial
college. They are very friendly to
the people's party in the horth, but in
the south it is different. The New
York World of Oct. 9th. Cleveland's
personal organ in New York, contains
a two column extract from the speech
delivered in Georgia by H. W. J. Ham
of that state, accompanied by his port
rait. To show his regard for the peo
ple’s party and the respect entertained
for them by Cleveland's supporters we
(juote me iouowing extract irom the
World's account of the speech:
•‘After jumping1 on the women's guff,
rage plank he asks the boys in a con
fidential way if they have ever seen
Mrs. Lease. “Well. I have, ” says he.
“Well, bovs, she is a plumb sight. If
I had a hound dog that would bark at
her as she passed by the gate. I'd kill
him before night She could sit on a
stump in the shade and keep the cows
out of a one-hundred-acre confield
without a gun. She's got a face that’s
harder and sharper than a butcher’s
clever. I could take her by her heels
and split an inch board with it. She’s
got a nose like an ant-eater, a voice
like a cat fight and a face that is rank
poison to the naked eye."
“The conditions in Georgia now,"
he will begin his speech, “are signifi
cant because all * the old elements
which have always fought democracy,
the snollygosters. shoulder-hitters and
sons of guns, the discordant elements,
every atom of which is a storm center
of political disintegration, are mus
tered under this piebald banner of so
called reform."
“In describing what will become of
the Third party he gives this little al
legory: “I have somewhere read a
story of a lion who lay asleep in a for
est. There came along a pestiferous
little animal whose name I will not
call who. with an oid grudge against
the lion, thought it would be some sat
isfaction to slip up and bite him, for
he thought be was dead. He awoke
and simply placed his paw uoon this
pestiferous little animal! and all that
was left of him was a greasy soot in
the sand and a little stench.
••I want to tell you, my fellow clti
the democratic lion in Geor.
gia is alive ana awake, and in Novem
ber he will place the paw of his power
upon this pestiferous little skunk of a
Third party, and all that will be left
of it will be a little greasy spot in the
sand and a little stench.”
What shall it profit a party to carry
Nebraska for Weaver and thereby
elect Cleveland and put in power a
gang of men that treat them in this
manner, and wbo ridicule and reject
every idea advanced by it. If you fa
vor free coinage of silver, why elect a
man who openly advocates the com
plete demonetization of that metal. If
you favor 1 ’fair and liberal pensions”
why vote so as to elect a man who
does not believe in giving any.
Price* of Perm Products.
If the farmer will carefully study the
changes in the market price of all farm
products by a comparison of the far
mer's price and the manufacturing
price, or in other words, the price on
the farm and the price at the factory,
he will see what an advantage manu
facturing states have over those which
are purely agricultural. The manu
facturing states during the past year
have been paying an average of 91
cents for corn, 9a cents for wheat; 60
cents for rye, 35 cents for oats, 60
cents for barley, 58 cents for Irish po
tatoes, and $11.25 per ton for hay;
while in the agricultural states the av
erage price for the same period was
for corn 25 cents, wheat 66 cents, rye
34 cents, oats 20 cents, barley 40 cents,
Irish potatoes 25 cents, and hay $5, SO
per ton, being an average of about 60
per cent, in favor of the manufactur
ing states. It cannot be said that the
cost of production in Pennsylvania is
any greater than it is in Wisconsin,
therefore the comparison leads the
thoughtful producer in this investiga
tion to clearly see and understand that
the farm needs the factory in order to
secure the best prices.
I The Farmer and Agricultural Imple*
menu-Are Not the Prices Eonrer
Than Ever Before KnoVrnl
We have been living now tor nearly
| thirty years under the protective sys
| tem. It protection has oppressed the
farmer by increasing his expenses,
then clearly he ought to be paying
more to-d^y for his necessaries than
he paid, say, ten years ago; certainly,
he would be paying more than the
British farmer pays, for the British
revenue system even longer than ours
has been a protective system. But
the fact is that the American farmer
’ pays in the American market less
money for all his supplies in 1892 than
he had to pay in 1880; he paid in 1880
less than in 1870, and in 1870 less than
in 18C0, when we were living under a
free-trade revenue; and he pays to-day
in the American market, protected as
it is from foreign assault, less money
than the British farmer pays in the
British market, open though it be to
the production of the whole world,
i We have been protecting all the ma.
| chines mentioned and England has not,
i and if protection raises prices and
| free trade lowers them, as the dem
■ ocrats allege, how under the sun can
it happen that farming implements
here are cheaper than in England? In
an address delivered at the Farmer’s
congress, in Chicago, in 1887, the
Hon. 'l'hos. H. Dudley, of New Jer
sey, formerly our Consul at Liverpool,
made this pertinent statement:
"Something over three years ago I
attended the national agricultural ex
hibition of France. It was held in
Paris, and a _ grand exhibition it was,
quite worthy of the great nation it
represented. I spent four days at the
exhibition. There were fourteen or
fifteen acres of ground covered with
farming implements, tools, machinery,
etc. All the exhibitors had their price
lists upon their exhibits, and I was
careful to obtain copies of them. The
lowest priced horse-rake was 250
francs, or $50 dollars of our money.
You can buy one just as good in any
town in the United States for $27. The
lowest priced mower was $102 in our
money, and was no better than we sell
for $00, if as good. The lowestpriced
reaper, without the binder, was $185
no better than ours for $110. The
plows, harrows and cultivators were
20 per cent above the price they are
selling for in the United States. There
was not a hoe, fork, shovel, spade or
rake on the ground but was dearer
in price and inferior in quality to ours.
•■i mere lore repeat what X nave said
before, that under our protective tariff
tbe prices of all manufactured com
modities, instead of being' enhanced,
have actually been reduced, and that
nine-tenths of all manufactured com
modities now used by our farmers and
latwrine people in the United States
are as cr ■ -ip as they are in England,
anti in m»uy instances cheaper.”
I U lio \l|l| Vote to Hake America a
I Free Trade Country?
! “It is an awful fact—it is really not
! sh°rt of awful—that in this country '
; (Great Britain) with all its wealth, all
its vast resources, all its power, 45 per
I cent—that is to say, nearly one
j half—of the persona who reach the
j age of 60 are or have been paupers.
I eay that it is a tremendous fact, and
I cannot conceive any subject more
! worthy of the attention of the Legisla
ture, more worthy of-the attlention of
us all.”—John Morley.
A Free Trade Flclnre.
[By an Englishman.]
“Though England is deafened with
spinning-weels, her pople. have not
clothes; though she is black with the
digging of fuel, they die of cold, and
though she has sold her soul for grain,
they die of hunger.”—John Ruskin.
Horses.
Again, how many farmers are aware
of the fact that there were 62,411 head
of horses imported and sold in the
i United States in 1888, and only 2,263
i exported. This is depriving the farm
ers of the United States of the sale of
over 60.000 horses annually; and the
same is true for each of the past five
years. Most of these horses came
from Canada, and, under the old law
paid a duty of 20 per cent ad valorem
on a value of about $45 per head;
while under the McKinley bill th«.
will have to pay at least $30 per head. j
which will undoubtedly stop their
coming: here, and the farmers of tb>
United States will reap the benefit!
thereof.
Calttle..
In 1887 there were 72,668, head et
beef cattle imported into our markets
thus adding to our surplus and depre.
dating the valuer paying a duty of |y
per head. The average importation
for the past five years has been 88,000
per year. Now, the act passed by the
republican party says to the Canadian
(most of these cattle come from Cana,
da), you must pay us a tax of (10 per
head if you want to sell your steers in
the United States.” Is not this all
right?
Buckwheat.
Why not protect the farmers of tbs
United States in raising farm products?
Why should farmers of other countries
find a market in the United States (or
65.000 bushels of buokwheat and pay
only ten per cent, ad valorem duty?
Why not make them pay us fifteen
cents per bushel, as provided in the
McKinley bill? It would take over
6.000 acres to produce the buckwheat
that was imported in 1889.
Flaxseed.
Last year 1,583,941 bushels of flax
seed were imported .ana none exported.
So the republicans said: “We will
put a tax of thirty cents per bushel on
flaxseed, ” for the benefit of the far.
mers.
Saur Kraut.
Canada sent $54,230 worth of saur
kraut, $4,100 worth of peanuts, $2,564
worth of sweet potatoes, 200.000 bar
rels of turnips, besides cabbage, caul
iflower and other vegetables, which
our Eastern farmers can raise just at
well as not, instead of raising so ex
clusively the less profitable crops of
wheat, oats and corn. The duty on
all vegetables not classified was in
creased from ten to twenty-five per
cent, ad valorem.
Barley.
We have been importing’ from Can
ada some eleven million bushels of
barley and malt annually. A large
number of the farmers of the United
States ask to have the tariff raised
from ten cents per bushel to thirty
cents per bushel (48 lbs.) The re
publican party says “all right, we
propose to help the farmer,” and so
they increase the tariff on barley. JThe
average yield per acre in the United
States is given at twenty-two bushels
per acre, and it will take 477,000 acres
to produce what barley is imported
from Canada.
Potatoes*
We Imported in 1888, 8,259,533
bushels of potatoes upon which a duty
of fifteen cents per bushel was paid.
Eastern farmers asked to have the
duty raised to twenty-five cents per
bushel, and this was done in order to
help the farmers of the United States.
' Beans.
The same year there was imported
1,942,864 bushels of beans and peas,
paying a duty of ten cents per bushel.
Our farmers requested this duty raised
to forty cents per bushel. This was
done, and at the same time the duty
was raised on a long list of other
vegetables for the benefit of the Eas
tern farmers. This was ail right was
it not? For if the Eastern States raise
commodities they will not be raising
wheat, oats, corn, and stock, and this
will help the Western farmer.
Hay.
There was 100,269 tons of hay im
parted in 178, paying a duty of two
dollars per ton. McKinley and the
Republicans thought they could help
the farmers in this and so made the
duty four dollars per ton. It will re
quire 100,000 acres to produce the im
ported hay.
Hops.
We are importing annually an av
erage of about 7,000,000 pounds of
hops more than we export, and it
would require seven thousand acres to
produce these. The tariff, formerly
eight cents per pound, is now fifteen
cents.
A Farmer’s Letter.
“Mono Valley, Kans.
••My Dear Sir: What will the
Democrats and Mugwumps do with the
tariff this session of Congress? As you
know, I am a farmer and quite an old
man, and I have lived in this country
a good many years when we had de
mocracy and free trade, and I know
what they are. In those days I drew
wheat from my farm in Indiana to Vin
cennes, a distance of 45 milea and
sold it for 33 cents a bushel, and took
calico at S5 cents a yard, and very
common brown sugar at 14 cents a
pound, and as is generally known, there
is much sand in Vincennes, and the
merchants were troubled with optical
delusions, and could not tell the dif
ference between common brown sugar
and yellow sand, and, as a result,
when we would get home we would
find our sugar badly mixed with sand.
Bemembering all this, I say, as an old
farmer, may the good Lord deliver us
from democracy and free trade.
• •Can’t you send me some docu
ments?"
[Laughter.] Yours truly,
W. H. Harper,
••Hon. R W. Perkins,
Washington, D. C."
Ttae Truth About Van Wfck.
Lincoln, Oct. 9, 1890.
To all Members of the Independent
People’s Committees, and to the Vo
ters of Nebraska:
__ It having become evident that Mr.
\ an Wyck has turned squarely against
the independent movement, and is
using his influence to defeat the inde
pendent candidates, we recommend
that he be not invited to adrress inde
pendent meetings nor given an oppor
tunity to use his unfriendly influence.
Geo. W. Blake,
Chairman State Central Cons.
C. H. PlBTLK,
Secretary State Central Com.
