Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Sept. 19, 1902)
, The Commoner. 2 n Blv 1; Mr- loavo it master of tho Hold. If you took Sff 'the duty on woolons tho wool trust would prob ably closo every ono of its mills. t Senator Lodge thought tho .methods of regulating trusts by putting them injo tho control of tho public through tho government is tho silliost remody over suggested. , Ho thought tho first remody is supervision and publicity, and tho latter is tho first thing to seek. Ho ndra.its that five per cent of the .trusts are bad! Can it bo that so many have failed to con tribute to tho republican campaign fund? What candid man, can read Senator Lodge's speech and thon believe that tho republican party Intends to employ any effective remedy or is competent to do so? A few years ago all trusts wore bad, now ninetoon out of twenty are good and harmless, and no earnest effort is being made to curb tho other five per con t this is the history of tho republican party on this question. If tho republicans are indorsed by tho people again thoy will bo convinced that trusts aro pop ular and must not bo interfered with at all. Sena tor Lodgo also suggests publicity, but neither ho nor Senator Dollivor mentioned tho enforcement of tho criminal law against tho trusts. Why this tendornoss when dealing with those who .im pudently and arrogantly disregard the statutes of tho United States? Neither of tho senators favored putting trust-made articles on tho free list. Why this solicitude for tho men who conspire against tho -very people who gonerously built a tariff .wall to protect tho manufacturers from outside com petition? It Is true, as Senator Lodgo says, that the put ting of trust-mado articles on tho froo list would in some cases only reduce tho profit and not nec essarily destroy the trust, but is that sufficient ob jection to such a law? The argument made by the sonator shows how short-sighted it is, for tho reorganizers tb urge- the froo list as a complete remedy it is a step In the right direction and will do much good, but it must be accompanied by something tnat strikes at tho principle of mon opoly. The Kansas Gity platform democrats favor publicity the only remedy suggested by the re publicans, and they favor putting trust-made ar-i tides ori"tho free list tho only remedy advocated by tho reorganizers, but .they go further than either and insist that "a private monopoly is in-" defensible and intolerable" even though it exists, without a tariff and all its affairs are made pubr lie. Tho Kansas City platform presents the only complete remedy and it is a significant fact that the reorganizers, where they present a general indorsement of tho last national platform, always neglect to Indorse -q anti-trust plank. The Kan sas City platform remedy is to distinguish between the natural man and the corporation nd to say that, while the natural man in one state must com pete with the natural man in any other state, the corporate person created by law ought to be shut up in the state of its origin until it shows that it i going into interstate commerce for a lawful purpose and not to act as a highwayman around the Industries. There is sufficient ground for this distinction. Natural men are much the same; they aro subject to tho same moral restraints and to piactlcally tho same criminal laws, and competi tion between them is, therefore, comparatively fair, but states differ widely In regard to the char acter of corporations organized, in regard to their regulation and the latitude given them. There is no reason why a natural person or even a corpor ation in a state which properly regulates corpora tions should be subjected to tho competition of a corporation organized in a state like New Jersey, whore corporations are given every license and immunity that unscrupulous groed can suggest It is no interference with natural or individual rights to say by federal statute that a corpora tion organized in a state must be satisfied to do business in that state unless it can show that it contains no watered stock and is not trying to monopolize any branch of business. These facts if they are facts can be easily shown. Tfcoy aro entirely in the possession of the corporation and it is no hardship on tho corporation to compel it to produce them. Every honest corporation desiring to do a legitimate business is interested in tho suppression of every illegitimate corporation which Is attempting to secure a monopoly This remedy does not interfere with the state's right to regulate its own affairs. It is not an in terference with tho state's rights to say that it shall hot convort Its territory into a "robbers' roost" and organise corporations to prey upon tho rest of tho country. A federal licenso to a cor poration to go outside of the state of its origin would not and should not prevent a state exercis ing control over foreign corporations.1 A federal licenso to sell liquor does not interfere with tho right or a stato to license or prohibit the sale of liquor within its borders, so the federal license 'suggested would not interfere with tho right of any stato to legislate as it pleases in regard to corporations organized or doing business within Its borders. Tho remedy suggested supplements the work of tne state without interfering with it in any way. .Somo object to increasing tho pow ers of tho federal government, but this remedy does not, in any way strengthen tho federal gov ernment It does not contemplate or permit tho creation of corporations by the federal govern ment (as President Roosevelt's plan does), but is merely intended to carry out the constitutional provision authorizing congress to regulate inter state commerce. Cdngress Is the1 only power that can regulate" commerce between the statds, and what more needful regulation can there bo than tho suppression of private monopolies? A private monopoly has always .btfen considered an outlaw and congress alona can furnish a complete remedy. Congress can prevent the use of the mails by a lottery, why not prevent tho use of the mails by. a private monopoly? Why not prevent the use of the interstate telegraph-lines and interstate railroads by a private monopoly? Why permit ar. industrial despotism to bo foisted upon the country when it catt be prevented by a brief stat ute? Senator Dolliver said he thought this rem edy unconstitutional, but his opinion is not bind ing upon congress or upon the supreme court Let it be tried and tested at once. There is no reason to believe that it would be declared un constitutional, but in the event of such a decision it would then' bo time to suggest a constitutional amendment, not tb allow congress to create. cor porations, but to allow congress to protect tho people of forty-four states from the corporations organized in ono state. The republicans talk about trusts, but thy have no effective remedy; the reorganizers talk about trusts, but tftoy have no complete remedy. The Kansas t City platform presents a complete remedy the only one and those who believe in that platform Insist that the people shall consider that remedy. It" is time to stop talking general ities and get down to business The Kansas City platform means business and that is the reason tho trusts spent ftiefr money lavishly to prevent the indorsement of that platform at tho polls, and that is also one reason why the reorganizers are so mvich opposed to' indorsing that platform. Here is. an "a nti-trust remedy that 'kills will the., president and his followers accept it? If not, they must suggest , something better or confess that they aro not in earnest JJJ A Sample of Exaggeration. i Bejow will be found an illustration of the ex aggeration sometimes employed by those who as sume to describe current events. Attention would not bo called to It but for the fact that such items are often made the basis for editorial comment and the public is constantly being misled: "Lincoln, Neb., Sept. 2. W. J. Bryan came near losing his life after the Labor Day ex orcises yesterday as the result of playing tho part of peacemaker. After the original com batants had been separated one of them made for Mr. Bryan with a revolver in one hand and a knife in the other. "Bryan was equal to the occasion, how ever, and at once closed with his assailant, who was frenzied from liquor and the excite ment of his previous conflict. Mr. Bryan is no weakling, but he was finding his antagonist anything but easy, and it looked as though he could hardly escape a slash from the knife, at least. "At this juncture John Burke, a bystander, came to his assistance, and the two speedily threw the enraged man on the ground and dis armed him. Those present wanted Mr. Bryan's assailant turned over to the police. Mr. 'Bry an, however, advised letting him go, and the assailant departed without anyone as much as learning his name. "Though a large number of people saw the affair no one present knew the man. After it was all over Mr. Bryan mounted his horse and rode away." Now behold how much smoke can arise from a little fire! The facts are: Mr. Bryan was going along the road with three other gentlemen when just In front of the party several half-iritoxicated men became involved in a quarrel and began strik ing at one another. Mr. Bryan joined those who wore with him In separating tho fighters, a thing easily accomplished, as the fighters did not seem to be very much excited. This was tho end of the incident. No knives wore drawn. One of the parties to tho fight said something about shooting VoiraYNo. 35. but 'he' did not draw any revolver and it is ver doubtful whether he had ohc.'v J but of this very Insignificant incident the jabove report was sent broadcast. The Labor Dav plciiic was a large and orderly one, and this the only disturbance noted, was not noticed by' any considerable number on; the., grounds. Speaking of exaggerations, another recent in stance might ba cited. The press dispatches have fceen chronicling tho purchase of "two $2,600 man tels" for Mr. Bryan's residence at4 Fairvie'w. The fact is that the most expensive mantel in tho house cost less than $200 and it was b'ough't of an advertiser in The Commoner whoso patronage con siderably lessens, the net outlay. '.. JJJ ' 't ; Idaho Democrats. '- The Idaho democrats met In state convention at Pocatello, September 4, and reaffirmed the Kan sas City platform. Although it was predicted by some that Idaho democrats would repudiate the national platform, these prophets are now wholly without honor. Tho Commoner congratulates the democrats of Idaho on their fidelity to democratic principles. They have not been misled by the Ingenious pleas of those who would republicanize the democratic party. They have shown themselves to be true to the faith and if there are democrats who at this moment fail to see the wisdom of"the course adopted by the democracy of Idaho, the eyes of the doubting Thomases will yet be opened, and they will realize that honesty is the best policy in tho affairs of political parties as well as in tho affairs of individuals. JJJ .Interpreting a Platform. That was(an interesting conference held at Des Moines, la., on the evening of September 4. Senator Dolliver, Speaker Henderson, and other members of Iowa's congressional delegation met with; the chairman of the republican state com mittee and Governor Cummins for the purpose of discussing the situation. 'Mr, Henderson said that the tariff and, the trusts were thiTis'sues and that the party should stand on f the" -state and na ional platforms, platforms which by the way, are inconsistent with one another at least so far as the tariff is concerned. Congressman Conner said that the Iowa plat form "was for protection, but not to ah unneces sary extent," and he thought the national and state platforms could be operated in harmony. Congressman Thomas interpreted the stato platform as a plain statement of the attitude of the republican party generally and Congressman Lacey said that in spite of the "no shelter for monopoly" provision in the Iowa state platform, there should be no radical change in the tariff. Congressman Hedge admitted that he didn't know just what he would have to meet until the campaign opened, but he was prepared for almost anything. Speaker Henderson said that while he would not have placed the "no shelter for monopoly" plank in the Iowa platform if he had had the fram ing of it, he could not see that the situation was at all serious. That plank did not mean, he de clared, that the present tariff is a shelter for monopolies. He urged all the republicans to stand squarely on the platform, saying lhat ho proposed to do so. If the Iowa platform did not mean that the present tariff is a shelter for monopoly, why did a republican state convention deem It necessary to protest against shelter for monopolies in the tariff? Mr. Henderson does not agree with the Chica go Tribune, that eminent republican newspaper, that says it is "a notorious fact" that the present tariff does provide shelter for monopoly; and Mr. Henderson does not agree with Governor Cum mins, who says: "The truth is that those who are enjoying monopolies aro every day laughing at the inertness of the people and wondering how long the reign of inactivity will continue." If the IOwa platform does not mean that the present tariff is a shelter to. monopoly, what, in the name of truth, does that platform mean and why was it adopted? iJi?he ?al10 rePublican convention-adopted a platform in which it declared: "We fayor a re 7 S S Lthe, tariff without, unreasonable delay which will place upon the f reorlist every article and product controlled by, monopoly." We pre mime Mr. Henderson Will say, that the Idaho re : Publicans did not mean that. there are any articles ?ii?ir(Jducts now on tbJ9 tariff list that ore con trolled by a monopoly.