tariff 



18903 T'he Mugwumps 



this matter the subsequent administration of 

 McKinley stood in marked contrast to that of 

 Harrison. 



I happened to be in the latter's office in the White The 

 House when McKinley entered from the House of f^'^'^^^y 

 Representatives with the text of his famous tariff 

 bill. To Elijah W. Halford, a well-known member 

 of the Indianapolis group, then the President's 

 secretary, I said that McKinley would live to regret 

 that bill. But I was mistaken; it was Harrison 

 himself who had to bear the burden, being defeated 

 for reelection by Cleveland, after which a rebound — 

 largely the result of the panic during the latter's 

 administration — made McKinley the next Presi- 

 dent. Moreover, the "free silver" issue, Bryan's 

 whole platform in two campaigns, had further 

 alarmed financiers, and thus played directly into the 

 hands of McKinley's backers. Indeed, on this issue 

 most of the "Mugwumps" (to which group I be- 

 longed) voted also for McKinley in 1896, fearing 

 that the financial disorders which must follow the 

 shifting of monetary standards would outweigh the 

 evils of high tariff and of the spoils system in poli- 

 tics. And in spite of those factors to which we were 

 continuously opposed, four years later most of us 

 again supported McKinley against Bryan. As 

 William P. Fishback, an able Indianapolis lawyer, 

 one of my good friends, remarked, "We were rowing 

 one way and looking the other." Some have re- 

 pented their choice in that dilemma; some have not. 

 It is, indeed, not impossible that Bryan would have 

 been the safer, as the rise of senatorial domination 

 was more of a menace than any financial heresy 

 originating with the people. 



C 135 3 



