6 Conservative *
ANTI-TUUST LEGISLATION PROPOSED
Y MR. IIUYAN.
The prominence Mr. Brynn is now
giving to the trust question justifies an
inquiry into the kind of legislation his
pat ty has proposed to correct the evils
which he declares exist. During the
last session of congress an amendment
to the Sherman anti-trust law , in accord
with the suggestions made by Mr.
Bryan at the Chicago trust conference ,
was proposed by the minority.
In a speech in the house of represen
tatives on June 1 , 1900 , Hon. Ohas. A.
Littlefleld , of Maine , shows up the ab
surdity of this amendment and the in
capacity of those proposing it to deal
with the trust question. Speaking upon
the section which made it a criminal of
fense for a corporation to engage in
trade outside of the state granting the
charter , Mr. Littlefleld said :
"The fact which determines what
corporations , firms , etc. , are subject to
the provisions of this section is simply
whether it owns or controls any planter
or business or a majority of the stock in
any plant or business similar to its own
in any 'other state , territory , or place
outside of the one in which it was
first chartered , organized , or formed,1
etc.
"Observe that they do not provide
that the corporations or institutions in
regard to which they legislate shall be
engaged in interstate commerce or shall
be engaged in crushing out competition ,
or that they shall be monopolies. They
do not undertake in this section to deal
with this juggernaut , this 'hydra-head
ed monster. ' They submit this bald ,
naked proposition. A firm organized
and doing business , for instance , in the
city of Washington cannot have a place
of business of similar character in Bal
timore unless it first files a long rigma
role of details specified in regard to
publicity.
"Next , what ? That it shall before
shipping or attempting to ship any of its
goods , brand them with the name of
the article , the name of the firm selling
same , and the place to which it is to be
shipped.
"Next , what ? Having provided that
a firm which has a place of business
in two states , though not in any way
connected with a trust there is no
suggestion of a trust made in this sec
tion after having complied with these
provisions with reference to publicity
and the requirement that they shall
brand their goods before undertaking to
ship them , they go further and say they
shall not be shipped at all. That is the
proposition ; that is the proposed demo
cratic legislation : Here is the lan
guage :
" 'Every such corporation , association
or partnership as referred to in this sec
tion , and every officer , agent or attor
ney thereof , THAT SHALL SHIP , OR
OFFER , OR ATTEMPT TO SHIP , OR
SELL OR DELIVER FOR SHIP-
MENT , OR PUT IN THE WAY OF
TRANSIT , to any other state or terri
tory , or to the District of Columbia , or
to any foreign country , any article or
merchandise dealt in , manufactured or
produced by it , or shall violate or fail
to comply with any of the provisions of
this section , shall be deemed guilty of a
misdemeanor , and on conviction thereof
shall be punished by a fine of not less
than five hundred dollars and not ex
ceeding five thousand dollars , and by
imprisonment of not less than six
months and not more than one year. '
A Cznr-Iiilco Proposition.
"I now come to the favorite panacea
of our friend , the democracy , for this
gigantic disease. Section 12 provides :
" 'That whenever the president of the
United States shall be satisfied that the
price of any commodity or article of
merchandise has been enhanced in con-
spquence of any monopoly as defined in
this act , he shall issue his proclamation
suspending the collection of all customs ,
duties or import taxes on like articles
of merchandise or commodities brought
from foreign countries. Such suspen
sions shall continue as long as such en
hancement in price of such oommodi-
Dies or article of merchandise exists ,
and until revoked by the proclamation
of the president. '
"MY FIRST OBJECTION IT MAY
BE A DEMOCRATIC OBJECTION-
IS THIS : THERE NEVER WAS AT
TEMPTED TO BE WRITTEN INTO
THE STATUTE BOOKS OF ANY
STATE OR OF THE UNITED
STATES A PROVISION SO VIO
LENTLY IMPERIAL AND CZAR-
LIKE AS THIS PROPOSITION. It
gives to the president of the United
States the power to enforce upon an or
ganization which is assumed to be crim
inal , for the express purpose of punish
ment , and that punishment is expected
to be business ruin , the penalty of the
law without even giving the offending
party the right to be heard. The presi
dent brings the charge ; he tries the
cause ; he renders judgment , and he ex
ecutes the sentence. If that is not
Oicsarism , if that is not imperialism , if
that is not centralization run mad , I
ask you to distinguish it. Search the
records of this country or any other
and see if you can find anything that
will equal it. No court within the bor
ders of Christendom ought to counten
ance for one moment o , statute which ,
under any circumstances , so flagrantly
violates the fundamental law as to au
thorize any man to pass upon the guilt
or innocence of any other man or set of
men without allowing them an oppor
tunity to be heard. It is only in the
infernal regions that they determine a
case without hearing. Yet that is the
proposition of our friends on the other
side.
"Where Was Colonel Bryan ?
"There was a tariff bill that instead
of destroying the sugar trust encourag
ed it , AND WHERE WAS WILLIAM
J. BRYAN COLONEL BRYAN , THE
GREAT ? HE WAS A MEMBER OF
THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMIT
TEE THAT REPORTED THE WIL
SON BILL THAT HAD A PREFER
ENTIAL TARIFF PERPETUATING
THE SUGAR TRUST UNDER THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES , NOW OUR DEM- /
OORATIO FRIENDS SAY , 'OH , LET
US SUSPEND THE TARIFF ON
TRUSTS. ' BUT WHERE WAS WILLIAM -
LIAM J. BRYAN WITH HIS 'SIM
PLE LITTLE BILL' IN 1894 ?
"Let William J. Bryan lake that and
explain it in some of these speeches that
he is about to make throughout the coun
try. Let him answer that when he dis
cusses trusts. William J. Bryan intro
duced in the Fifty-second congress a
bill ( H. R. 8977) ) and another bill ( H. R.
9004) ) providing for placing trust-made
articles upon the free list. It was the
session when the Wilson bill was passed.
"What did William Jennings Bryan
do with those bills ? He had them very
promptly referred to the ways and
means committee , of which he was a
member , and of which our democratic
friends had the control. Where are
those bills ? They never were resurrect
ed until I dug them up two or three
days ago , encumbered by the dust by
which they were intended to be smoth
ered when they were referred to the
democratic committee. "
MR. HEWITT TO MR. SCHNIT/EK.
Dear Mr. Schnitzer : I am very glad
to be reminded by your letter of the
7th inst. of the fact that you were good
enough to ask my advice in the political
exigency which then existed.
The political situation at this time is
of a very different character from that
which presented itself four years ago.
At that time it seemed possible to main
tain a distinct democratic organization ,
based upon the fundamental principles
enunciated by Jefferson , and which had
continued to govern the party in all
previous presidential elections. The
nomination of Palmer and Buckner was
not made with any idea that they could
be elected , but in order to preserve an
organization about which sound democrats - ;
crats could rally , in case the heresies of
the Chicago platform should be repudia
ted by a subsequent convention profess
ing to be democratic.
The recent convention held at Kansas
City has , however , rendered all such ex
pectation hopeless. The party which
calls itself democratic is in reality popu-
listic and based upon doctrines which , if
carried into effect , would produce poli
tical anarchy. No doubt you are fam
iliar with Taine's "History of the French
Revolution. " In the second volume ,
entitled "Democracy , " yon will find all
the heresies of the Chicago platform
practically announced and the dreadful
consequences of striving to put these
false doctrines into operation are re-
1 !
