458 
THE KUBaL HEW-VORKES. 
JULY 7 
GRAND JUBILEE. IQO days * nights 
CELEBRATING THE 
lOOth ANNIVERSARYHISETTLEMENTSCINCIN'H'ATI, 
The OHIO VALLEY amthe NORTH-WEST TERRITORY. 
ART-SCIENCE-INDUSTRY. 
MONSTER NEW BUILDINGS, 
in the heart of the city, 
within ten minutes’ ride of 
all hotels and stations. 
GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT 
of Treasures from the War, 
Navy and other Departments, 
the Smithsonian Institute, 
National Museum and Fish 
Commission. 
All Buildings brilliantly 
illuminated by innumera¬ 
ble Electrical and Gas Jets. 
Wonderful display of 
ELEC TRIC LIGH TING , 
AN ART DEPARTMENT 
of the iinest collection of 
Paintings and Sculpture 
ever made in America, val¬ 
ued at $1,000,000. 
Horticultural Ilall of un¬ 
equalled beauty. 
PIONEER RELICS 
from all parts of the North¬ 
west. The great 
MUSIC HALL, 
devoted to Music, Spectacles 
and Performances. 
MACHINERY HALL, 
1,500 Feet in Length, 
through which will ply gon¬ 
dolas from Venice. 
EDUCATIONAL, 
and numerous other De¬ 
partments perfectly ar¬ 
ranged. 
fox t\)t |)xnmg. 
TALKS BY UNCLE MARK. 
The political battle is now fairly opened. 
The nominations have been made and the 
various platforms are before us. Now we 
can start out and study the subject fairly. 
The way I propose to go at it is this. 1. Study 
carefully the platforms of the three parties. 
These platforms are supposed to be statements 
of party principles. Suppose the Rural New- 
Yorker should say that during the next 
year it proposes to advocate level culture of 
corn and potatoes, early cutting of grass, 
temperance in eating and drinking, economy 
and simplicity in dress and food, justice for 
the poor and punishment for all frauds aud 
many other things that it considers right aud 
proper. That statement would be its plat¬ 
form aud the people who proposed to take it 
would have to look to this statement for their 
reasons for taking it. So with these party 
platforms—the first thing to do is to see what 
the parties offer to do. 
2. Investigate the histozy of each party 
and candidate, and use the very best of our 
common sense in deciding which of these 
promises are soundest. It is never good busi¬ 
ness to take what we hear for granted, just 
because somebody who ought to know tells us 
about it. A promise is all very well so far as 
it goes, but we- know there are promises and 
promises. By way of illustration ; it might 
be that some other paper proposed to do all 
that the Rural offered to do. How should a 
man tell which oue would come nearest to 
the point? There would be no way but to get 
acquainted with both papers and find out 
what they had done aud how well they had 
treated their subscribers. Great parties do 
uot change very much. They improve aud 
grow in their ideas as older men give u^the 
leadership to younger men, but it is pretty 
safe to say that, as a general thing, the future 
history of a party can be judged pretty well 
by its past history. It is something like a 
man’s private history. If we know that he 
has beeu found on a certain side of a question 
at some time of life, and has not changed his 
mind, we may be pretty sure be will be found 
there whbn the question comes up aguin. And 
so with political parties. The history of this 
country is before us and we can check off a 
good many of these political promises by the 
records. While I have always considered the 
principles of a party of more importance than 
the candidate, I always like to know the dif¬ 
ference between the men. Every young man 
is drawn towards a self-made man. He can’t 
resist this attraction because, whenever a man 
works himself up to a place where he is looked 
upon as fit to do the will of the people, he is a 
living illustration of a great truth that has 
helped to make this country what it is. Every 
American boy has a chance to be President 
some day. 
So we will get ready for voting by finding 
what the different parties propose to do for us, 
and what reasons we ■ can find for supposing 
they mean what they say. Then we will see 
what sort of men they choose to represent 
them and make use of our common sense in 
deciding which side we can honestly fight for. 
I am going to try and be just as fair as I can 
be in this discussion, and if I fail to do either 
side justice, why I want to make it right. 
People must read the platforms and speeches 
and messages for themselves, I give here my 
own conception of their meanings. Perhaps 
I am prejudiced and can’t state things fairly 
—I hope not, however, 
DEMOCRACY. 
The Democrats being the party in power 
are responsible for the conduct of the govern¬ 
ment. Their position is like that of a man who 
has had charge of a business for a term of 
years. He wants to keep in his place, so he 
comes to those who hire him aud says that ho 
knows he can do the work better and cheaper 
than anybody else can, and therefore ought, 
as a matter of business, to be reappointed. 
Then he goes on to tell what he has done, how 
much he has saved, how houest he has been 
and what be proposes to do if he is kept in his 
place. The Democrats do this. They are not 
very plain m some of their statements, but we 
can get a pretty clear idea of what they mean. 
They want everybody to step up and investi¬ 
gate their work. They claim to have saved 
the people 100,000,000 acres of land which the 
Republicans were allowing corporations and 
monopolies to capture. They also say they have 
paid out more money for pensions to old sol¬ 
diers aud sailors than was ever paid before 
during an equal period. They claim to have 
kept the peace with all foreign nations at no 
great cost to our owu people and to have ex¬ 
cluded the Chinese effectually, though this, 
they say, has been hindered by the Republi¬ 
cans. They are sure that President Cleve¬ 
land has maintained an honest Civil Service— 
mainly by his own example. The Democrats 
claim that they have guarded the rights and 
welfare of all the people and protected all, 
without regard to race or color. The main 
point of interest this year is the standing of 
the parties on tho tariff question. On this 
point the Democrats are not as clear as I wish 
they were. I can’t tell exactly what they do 
mean as they indorse President Cleveland’s 
message aud also the Mills Bill which docu¬ 
ments differ in some point*. As I understand 
it, they are afraid of tho surplus in the U. S. 
Treasury because they think all that money 
comes out of the pockets of the people, and 
also makes a good mark for public thieves. 
They want to reduce public expenses and to 
cut off all unnecessary taxes. They think this 
can be done by cutting down the tariff on cer¬ 
tain articles. This they say will reduce the sur¬ 
plus because there will be less money comiug in, 
while goods will be cheaper and consequently 
living will notcostso much. Trusts, combina¬ 
tions aud monopolies of all kinds, they say, 
are made possible by a high tariff because 
such a tariff shuts out all competition with 
other countries and enables manufacturers to 
set about any price they like on their goods. 
The Democrats would start, as I understand 
what they say, with raw materials like wool, 
lumber, salt, sugar, vegetables, etc. These 
they would let in free of duty. This step, they 
say, would enable the manufacturers to make 
cheaper goods because the materials of which 
the goods are made would cost less. Then, they 
say, the manufacturer would have to sell his 
goods for less aud all would be satisfied. The 
Democrats are careful to say that nobody 
wants absolute Free Trade. They say they 
want to revise the tariff, but they don’t tell us 
where they propose to stop, which is surely 
quite an important point. This seems to me 
like the weakest point in the platform. When 
people go into a new business they want to 
know how far they are going—what tho stop¬ 
ping point is going to be. I wish the Demo¬ 
crats had been more specific on this point aud 
stated just w here they would stop. There is 
nothing liko kuowing justexactly what we are 
going to do. 
REPUBLICANISM. 
The Republicans are in the position of a 
man who used to be in a place of trust. His 
employer gave another man a trial to see if he 
couldn’t get better work. Now, at the end of 
the second man’s trial, the first man comes 
back and proposes to show that the second 
man is injuring the business aud that the first 
man ought to have the place again because 
his plans are better and his general idea of 
business far ahead of the second man’s Then 
he proceeds to show where he thinks the 
second man has made mistakes or gone wrong 
aud where he could beat such a record. As it 
is a pretty important thing for him, ho makes 
his statement just as strong as he can. He 
gees on the principle that the owners of the 
business—the people—will select the man who 
can do the most to advance the interests of 
the business. Of course this first man has to 
admit that a good many of his clerks were not 
what they should have been. He says he has 
discharged all the rascals and hired a new set 
all through. Then ho says that the second 
man has simply carried out the business as he 
planned it, and that the second man’s success 
is due to the fact that he started things. But 
my space is pretty well used up and I must 
wait until next week before I talk about the 
Republican promises. 
Hood’s Sarsaparilla 
This successful medicine is a carefully-prepared 
extract of tho best remedies of tho vegetable 
kingdom known to medical science as Alteratives, 
Blood Purifiers, Diuretics, and Tonics, such as 
Sarsaparilla, Yellow Dock, Stillingia, Dandelion, 
Juniper Berries, Mandrake, Wild Cherry Bark 
and other selected roots, barks and herbs. A 
medicine, like anything else, can he fairly judged 
only by its results. We point with satisfaction to 
the glorious record Hood’s Sarsaparilla lias en¬ 
tered for itself upon tho hearts of thousands of 
poople who have personally or indirectly been 
relieved of terrible suffering which all other 
remedies failed to reach. Sold by all druggists, 
gl; six for $5. Made only by C. I. IIOOD & CO., 
Apothecaries, Lowell, Mass. 
100 Doses One Dollar 
