HAT 11, 190
5
r
Some Facts About The So -Called Panic of 1893
The Commoner.
Secretary of the Treasury Shaw devoted con
siderable attention to the tariff questions in an
address delivered at St Louis. Mr. Shaw remind
ed hia hearers of the hard times of 18934, and
he sought to impress upon their minds the idea
that tariff legislation by a democratic congress
the Wilson bill was responsible for the hard
times of that period.
It will be just as well to keep history straight.
The truth is that every panic since the civil
war originated under republican rule and de
veloped under republican legislation.
The great panic which gave "Black Friday"
to his'cory occurred during the month of Septem
ber, 1869, when the republican party was in
power.
The great panic marked by the failure of
Jay Cooke & Co., occurred in September, 1873.
Then the republican party was in power and
eleven months prior to the beginning of that
panic that party had been re-elected to power.
The hard times to which Secretary Shaw re
fers did not begin in 1894; they began long prior
to that year and, indeed, long prior to the presi
dential election of 1892; and it is a fact, although
republican orators and republican organs try to
forget it, that the so-called panic of 1893 began
and played its greatest havoc under that famous
tariff law known as the McKinley bill.
It may be well for Commoner readers to keep
readily at hand some of the facts and figures
relating to this question.
The republican party was restored to power
March 4, 1889.
The McKinley tariff bill became a law Octo
ber 6, 1890, and remained in effect until August
27, 1894.
The Wilson tariff law, enacted by a demo
cratic congress went into effect August 27, 1894.
If any one will take the trouble to examine
the republican campaign text-book for 1904,
pages 125, 126, and 127 he will find considerable
space devoted to a statement of business disas
ters from July IS, 1893, until November 13, 1894.
R 'PVin "utttiiihUnoTi monnnrnHn nvnonl-nil 4-Vril wnn1m3
A UO tOJ;JUUtlUU UiUUUCiD CAlbbkCU WC11 J tttUCIU
to remember that the Cleveland administration
was inaugurated March 4, 1893, and that all these
disasters occurred undor democratic administra
tion; .but they expected their readers to forget
that Vie republican tariff law was in force up to
August 27, 1894, or covering more than twelve
month's of the sixteen months period of business
disasters as described by the republican text
book.
In their references to the panic of 1893 re
publican orators and organs habitually overlook
the date when the McKinley law ceased and the
Wilson law went into effect. But when In their
tariff discussions they are required to face the
fact that that panic played Its greatest havoc
during the life of the republican tariff law they
answer that it was the anticipation of tariff legis
lation growing out of democratic victory in 1892
which brought on these business disasters. For
this reason in their Hat of business disasters
they place July 18, 189C as marking the beginning
of that great panic.
Let it be remembered that the McKinley
tariff bill became a law October 6, 1890, and that
the first indications of the so called panic of
1893-4 were given November 11, 1890, A LITTLE
MORE THAN THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE MC
KINLEY TARIFF BILL BECAME A LAW.
From that date the panic raged.
The Harrison administration was inaugurated
March 4, 1889, and when the first Indications of
this panic were given President Harrison had
not exhausted the half of the term for which he
was elected. It is admitted by everyone familiar
with the facts that President Harrison's adminis
tration had plates prepared for the bonds and Mr.
Harrison's secretary of the treasury made a visit
to New York for the purpose of negotiating the
bond deal. He was wired by Mr. Harrison to re
turn to Washington. Mr. Harrison said that ho
had concluded not to have any bond issues under
his administration and in order to avoid the
stigma the Harrison administration warded off
the bond issue and unloaded it on the incoming
Cleveland administration.
It may not be out of place to point out that
when the democratic administration surrendered
the reins of government, March 4, 1889, there
was in the federal treasury the largest surplus
in history. When the republican party went out
of power, March 4, 1893, thero was a largo deficit
and the incoming administration was finally per
suaded to mako the bond issues which its repub
lican predecessor had at one time thought to bo
necessary, but had skillfully avoldod.
Tho claim that the business disasters of the
period referred to were duo to tho popular fear
of tariff legislation to be enacted by democrats
is, as has been said, met by tho fact that this
panic began two years prior to the presidential
election day of 1892. The following will sorvo
as reminders on this point:
.November 11, 1890, the reports showed finan
cial distress in New York. The New York clear
ing house association voted its certificates to
banks in need of assistance.
The Boston clearing house association did
the same thing November 17, Barker Bros. &
Co., big bankers in Philadelphia, suspended at
that time, with liabilities placed at $5,000,000.
November 19, 1890, thero was a run on th6
Citizens' Savings bank of New York, and a re
ceiver was appointod for the North Rlvor bank.
November 22, 1890, the United Rolling Stock
company of Chicago assigned, with liabilities at
$6,8517000.
November 28, 1890, B. K. Jamieson & Co., the
Philadelphia bankers, failed, with liabilities at
$2,000,000.
December 6, 1890, the Oliver iron and steel
mills of Pittsburg shut down, discharging 2,000
employes. On tho same date the cotton firm of
Myor & Co. of New Orleans failed, with liabili
ties at $2,000,000.
January 3, 1891, the Scottdale rolling mills
and pike works and the Charlotte furnace and
coke works in Pennsylvania closed, throwing
10,000 employes out 'of work.
January 18, 1891, the American National bank
at Kansas City suspended, with liabilities at
$2,250,000.
May 8, 1891, the Spring Garden National bank
at Philadelphia closed Its doors, and the Pennsyl
vania Safe Deposit and Trust company made an
assignment.
The Homestead strike and other strikes dur
ing 1892, and prior to election day, are well re
membered by the people.
PROSECUTE THE ROCKEFELLERS
Commissioner of Corporations Garfield has
finally discovered that the Standard Oil Trust is
violating the law. He has so reported to the
president, and the president has transmitted the
report to congress. In his message to congress
Mr. Roosevelt says: "The department of justice
will take up the question of instituting prosecu
tions in at least certain of these cases."
It Is to be hoped that these proceedings will
be commenced as soon as possible and vigorously
pushed. The men in charge of the Standard Oil
Company are afraid of prison bars. They would
speedily go to their knees In the presence of a
determined effort to place in jail every one of
them who is responsible for the wrong-doing.
It has all along been a mystery why John
D. Rockefeller was spared when -witnesses were
called in the recent .inquiry set on foot by the
attorney general for Missouri. To be sure, Mr.
Rockefeller went' into hiding, but the Very fact
that he was so anxious to avoid the witness chair
should have prompted Missouri's attorney general
to keep proceedings open until Rockefeller's testi
mony had -been secured.
If there is to be anyx serious prosecution of the
Standard Oil company, John D Rockefeller should
not be spared. Every one of the money-maddened
men whose genius has been employed in the
construction of the greatest and most vicious trust
in the world should be called beforethe bar of
justice.
Not long ago we were told that Mr. Gar
field had given the Standard Oil officials the same
"immunity bath" to which he treated the beef
trust magnates. If that be true, these men may
escape upon the same technicality that was ad
vanced in behalf of the packers. It will, however,
be well if a determined effort be made to vindi
cate the majesty of the law in the presence of the
intolerable crimes committed by the Standard Oil
"captains of industry."
JJJ
CAN IT BE?
A dispatch to the Omaha World-Herald, under
date of Des Moines, Iowa, April 26, follows: "The
unanimous refusal of Des Moines hotel men to
entertain negro ministers who may come to the
Presbyterian general assembly here has caused
considerable consternation among the members
of the local entertainment committee. The situ
ation was discussed seriously at a meeting of the
reception committee today and it may be neces
sary to ask members of the local Presbyterian
churches to take the eminent colored divines into
their own homes. Some of the most prominent
negro workers of the country are coming."
And this in the state of Iowa, which prides
itself upon its "overwhelming republican major
ity." Can it be possible that race prejudice is not
confined to the southern states? Can it be pos
sible that aside from his devotion on election
day the Iowa republican is no more partial to the
negro than is the Texas democrat?
JJJ
SPINNING?
The St. Louis Globe-Democrat says: "Sen
ator Tillman inadvertently stepped into the path
of Senator Hopkins, and is still spinning." The
Congressional Record does not indicate that Mr.
Tillman stepped into Mr. Hopkins' path "inad
vertently." It is plain that tho South Carolina
senator went after the Illinois senator deliber
ately, and it is equally plain that Mr. Tillman
gave Mr. Hopkins the unpleasantest hour he has
spent in recent years.
JJJ
UNBECOMING
The attorney general for the state of Texas
has commenced proceedings against the Armour
and Swift packing interests, for the purpose of
securing penalties for violation of anti-trust laws.
Representatives of the packers say that these
proceedings will result in their withdra al from
the Lone Star state. The time has gone by when
such threats can be effective. The people will
not long bo deterred from enforcement of the law
on the theory that business establishments neces
sary to the life of the people depend for their ex
istence upon lawless men. There Is sufficient
profit in the meat packing business; conducted
along legitimate lines, to make the packers rich.
It is not at all likely that these packers will vol
untarily withdraw from Texas; but even so it
would be better for the people of the Lone Star
state to have these haughty magnates withdraw
from that commonwealth rather than to permit
them to defy the law. Soon the people in every
state will be so thoroughly aroused that it would
be necessary for these packers to threaten to
withdraw from other states. Then where will
they go? These trust magnates may thank their
lucky stars that they are not serving time behind
the bars. Under the circumstances threats from
that source are, to say the least, unbecoming.
JJJ
PILING IT ON
In his St. Louis speech Secretary of the Treas
ury Shaw said: "A tariff law, to be successful,
must be coherent. It must protect, if you please,
as does tho Dingley tariff law, the man who grows
barley, and it must then protect with a higher
duty the one who makes malt from barley, and
with a yet higher duty him who makes beer from
malt, with another increase of duty when bot
tled." In other words, Mr. Shaw would build this
tariff wall as high as the tower of Babel; and the
erection of such a wall would be just as foolish
as the erection of the tower of Babel was.
The extraordinary high rates in the Dingley
tariff law wero not created in accordance with
the principle as described by Mr. Shaw unless dis
tinguished republican witnesses are in error. We
have it on the testimony of Senator Dollivar that
Mr. Dingley said that the rates in the Dingley
bill were placed high with the view of reducing
them, and as a basis for bringing about reciprocity
with other countries. But once the extraordinary
high rates were established the tariff barons,
true to their characteristics, refused to surrender
their great advantage. And the republican party,
true to its historic attitude, has rushed to the de
fense of the absurd position taken by these bar
ons; it seeks to justify as a great principle that
which on Senator Dolliver's testimony alone -is
shown to be robbery,
JJJ
DEPEW AND SMOOT
The things of which Senator Depew has been
guilty have been sufficient to drive him from
many of tho business concerns and educational
institutions with which his name has been asso
ciated, but he yet retains his seat in the Ameri
can "house of lords." It is announced that Sen
ator Depew will vote for the expulsion of Sena
tor Smoot of Utah. And will he then insist upon
retaiai&g-mttiJ?p.i seat?
n
! MtfLljaBtkbm.
.r. .... i
jOWUA
