Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-03-27
ANTITRUST BILL.
Some Formal Amendments We're
Made Thereto In rester-
days Senate.
THE QUESTION OF wYomIEe.s
ADMISSION.
As1O,00O Libel Suit.-Madame Tse-
brikoTa's Letter TO The
Russian Gar.
y Telegraph to the NKwsl
THE ANTITRUST BILL.
Discussion I'm the senaIe.-wyom.
ing Admission Bill.

ing Admission Bill.
WAsHISGToN, March 26.-In the
Senate, after transacting business OF
minor Importance, the antitrust
bill was taken up and various formal
amendments made.
Spooner offered an amendment
giving committees authority to is
sue writs Of injunction prohibiting
combination, from proceeding furth-
er in business except to wind up
their affairs. The legal bearing and
effect OF the amendment as well as
the bill, were generally discussed by
SpOoner, Gray, Stewart, Hoar, Vest,
Reagan and Eustis.
After some remarks in reply to
something said by Reagan yester-
day, Vest said that he would not
say another word about the Consti-
tuition. He was prepared to '.join
the procession" He would like the
Senator from Ohio lSherman) 10 say
whether he considered the clause
incorporated in the bill by Ingalls,
amendment 'simposinga tax on deal
ings in options'' constitutional or
not. He characterized the bill as a
remarkable act of legislative leger-
demain.
Curtis said that he regarded the
bill As the greatest usurpation Of
state rights ever attempted in the
history Of the government.
ingalls, said his amendment was
not intended 10 interfere with bar
gains, purchases, sales or exchange
OF any products Of which the parties
might be possessed or be the pro-
ducers, or which they intended &C.
tually TO deliver. Ii was directed
against the gigantic modern inven-
ton known as dealing in futures"
His amendment had been met at
every stage Of the proceeding by
the interpositisn OF some question Of
order or some
QUESTION OF CONsrITUTIoSALFTY.
The people of the United States,
ingalls, continued, have a reason
able degree Of respect for the Con-
stitutien, tut they are not afraid of
it. The Constitution was growth
and not q manufacture, and the
Constitution Of 1880, by reason of the
operation Of the will Of the people
who made it, was n vastly different
instrument from the Constitution Of
1859. Its authors would not know
it. They made il for a specific pur-
pose. not for the object Of enabling
country lawyers to devise defini-
tons, or 10 put obstacles and harri-
ers 10 the will of the people. But
the Constitution was perpetually in
vOkeG by narrow and rigid and H.
liberal constitutionalisis as an in
superable barrier against every ef-
fort 10 benefit the condition Of
the people. The senators support |
ing the bill had been tainted with |
bad faith, with false chivalry; with |
n sham battle, because |
they attempted to carry into effect |
= provision which was entirely |
within the limits and provisions Of
the Constitution. Those gentlemen |
Eustis, George and Nest) had spent
time eNdeavOring 20
destroy that Constitution. There |
had been no step in national prog
ress during the last thirty years
against which these senators had
not risen and declared it against the
Constitution. He Qngalls) recol-
lected that there was once a great
demonstration to prove that there
was power in the Constitution TO CO.
cree State which saw fit TO so out
of the Union, yet the people had
found it. There had been similar
protests against the