The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-05-02
mnRK OF THE HOUSE.
z;us from the judiciary Committee
Get the Blight of Way.

:r.r,sdiota consideration of bills reported
from the judiciary committee in the follow
-, order; The Senate bill relating to trusts:
!hs House bill relating to trusts, the House
Iii relating to copyrights; the House bill
1.istinO TO bankruptcy, and such other bills
- the committee may call up, this order to
Ia in force to-day and tomorrow. The
nrevious question was ordered. the vote
bbeing. Yeas, Isl; nays, 10
Nj NcNillen OF Tennessee moved to recon-
-, IL the resolution with instructions to the
nnrnrniti ee on rules to report back a resolu-
tion fixing the day for consideration of the
oonti-trust bill alone. The motion was lest,
tbe vote being yeas 81; nays 125.
The resolution was adopted and the House
IN accordance with its terms, proceeded to
consider the Senate bill TO protect trade and
commerce against unlawful restraints and
monopoles.
FAVORED BY CULBERsoN.
Mr. Culberson of Texas advocated the
hin II confined itself, he said. to subjects
over which there was confessedly no ques-
tion about the DO yer of congress to legis-
iate and did not invade any doubtful
grounds. He did not know, nor could any
man know until the question bad been de-
termjned by the courts, what contracts
would be covered by the terms of the bill.
Mr.. Morse of Massachusetts inquired
what effect the bill would have upon manu-
fscturers of proprietary articles, who fixed
their own price.
GOOD AID FOR MORSE.
r MIR. Culberson replied that, in his opinion,
If the gentlemen from Massachusetts sold
his Rising Sun stove polish to retailer
under contract. that the retailer should sell
at a fixed price and receive a commits
sion. This contract would be in
restraint of trade, but it was
difficult to tell just what contracts were
embraced in the provisions OF the bill. No
one could tell just how broad a swath was
cut. Upon this explanation of Mr.. Culber-
son so1ne of the opposition to the bill in the
subsequent debate was based, the members
declaring their opposition to bill which
needed decision of the court to interpret
Mr.. Culberson was piled with fire of ques-
tions as to how the bill would operate in
given cases.
dir. Henderson of Colorado inquired if
the bill goes as far as the constitutional
power of congress can go.
Mr.. Culberson replied that in his opinion
it did.
Mr.. WILSON TURNS CRITIC.
Mr.. Wilson of West Virginia criticised
the majority for its method of conducting
business There was no great legislative
chamber among any of the foremost nations
of the world in which there was so much
blind voting as in the American House of
Representa- tives. The rules were so admin
istered that no member could tell what
measure was to be brought up for the days
delibel ations. The committee ON rules came
in morning after morning with resolutions
for the immediate consideration of some
great public question. This performance
was fast becoming a travesty upon free
aaNf ha
legislating, not under the committee
system, but under the caucus system.
Here was bill, bristing with pains and
penalties, making criminal acts which to-
day were not criminal, deranging the course
of trade among the states. introducing
doubt and distrust into business; yet the
House was called upon to put it on the stat
ute books without deliberate or intelligent
consideration when the gentleman in charge
of it (Mr. Culberson) as learned and able
lawyer as there was in the House, said time
and again that it could only be interpreted
by the courts.
WOULDN'T ACCOMPLISH IT'S OBJECT.
He did not believe that the bill would
accomplish it's object. The first and most
deadly blow at trusts, he said, must come,
net from congress, but from the states.
The states gave the charters. The courts
of New York had held that when corpo-
ration chartered by the law of a state for
purpose entered into a combination by the
surrender of its stock, it vacated its char
ter. If anybody supposed that this bill, no
matter how it bristled with pains and pen
alties, would prevent combin ations in the
nature of trust he did not understand the
and method of operation of trusts.
He then asked what was the cause of
trusts, and discussed the question from the
of tariff reform, in a speech of
length. The republicans of
the House, he said, were bringing in in one
hand bill to strengthen the trusts of the
country (the tariff bil). and in the other a
bill that nobody knew the meaning of, and
that might introduce chaos into business,
professedly to punish them.
LION IN THE LOBBY.
81 hear lion in the lobby roar; say, Mr.
Speaker, shall we close the door and keep
him out, or shall we let him in and see if
we can get him out again?" The democrats
said, .'Close the door" The republicans
said, "Let him in and then we will try to
get him out again. The republicans invited
trusts and then punished them.
Mr.. Savers of Texas offered an amend
ment authorizing the President to put on
the free list any imported article which is
the subject of trust in this country. The
amendment was ruled out on a point of
order.
E. B. Taylor of Ohio said that the fact
that the gentleman from West Virginia had
talked about matter not before the House
demonstrated the necessity of having rules
by Wholesome legislation might sometimes
be passed. He regretted that the gentleman
had not retained his tariff speech until next
week, for if he had had more time he would
have been more interesting.
A DEFENSE OF THE TARIFF.
The gentleman has said that in this coun-
try the tariff caused trusts. Where the
tariff operated most largely there were no
trusts. There was none in the iron industry,
there was none in the wooden industry, there
was none in the cotton industry. The gen.
ueman spoke of the tariff on tin plate. Did
he not know that every pound of that arti-
ethat came TO this country came through
asyndicate which put an arbitrary price on
the commodity--a syndicate not in this
country but in Europe. The gentleman's
proposition was to leave this
country at the mercy of
foreign trusts, while, if there was protect
I've tariff on tin plate, American manufac-
tturers could compete with foreign trusts.
IL regard to the pending bill, Mr.. Taylor
sad that it went as far as any legislation
which could be passed under the constitu-
uon. 1t must be supplemented with legis-
iatlon by the states. What the precise def
HiiEon of trust was, and what state OF
tacts would justify penalties being imposed,
could be ascertained only by submission to
the court.
. The debate was continued by Messrs
cannon MoAT AfAL ir,1a D,1t-