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degree of influence, were either openly declaring or tacitly confessing that the protective tariff must and would be repealed.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.