The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-09-12
RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRUSTS.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRUSTS.
One of the most remarkable publications
that has appeared in the republican press
recently is a savage assault on trusts by
the ultra-republican New York Press. 1t
says:
AS a rule, however, trusts undoubtedly
add to the cost Of the articles whose prov
ductiOn they monopOlize. The trusts, by
their enormous combinations of capital,
take freedom of trade by the throat and
trample ont Of existence the business man
or firm that dares to compete with them.
Their methods at the best are menace
to the welfare of the community and are
distinctly anarchistic, not stopping short
in we'll known instances Of the anarch-
lists dynamite and violence. The trust,
with a braZen treason against the funda-
mental principles Of American liberty, says
virtually to every citizen outside of the
trust: Thou shalt not dare TO compete
with this business of ours. If we cannot
crush you by fair means we will by foul
means. American laws pretend to pro
tect you in your right to compete, but
we set those laws at defiance and laugh
them to scorn." This is anarchy. There
cannot be freedom without the right of
composition in legitimate trade.
Moreover, the Press declares that 1.-The
trusts must CO." 1t does not propose TO
tolerate them any longer. 1t declares
that they are as ''tyranlcal odious and
oppressive as under Elizabeth or James"
This is very true, and 1t is also true, as
the Press states, that against those
monopoles, crushing the life and ambi-
ton out of trade our ancestors struggled
with indomitable energy, perseverance
and every lawful business was virtually
thrown open to every reputable freeman"
But having told this much of the truth
the Press makes the absurd declaration
that the free trade movement tends TO
build up trusts"
This is a very remarkable change Of
front since Mr.. Blaine declared, in re-
ply to Mr.. Cleveland, that trusts were
private affairs" with which Mr.. Cleve-
land had nothing to do, and his party
backed him up by defending trusts and
telling what an advantage the Standard
oil company had been TO the country. The
free trade movement responsible for
trusts! The country is full Of them, and
the Press cannot point to single one
that did not originate under republican
protection. We challenge it 70 name one
only one-out Of the great number that
now clutch domestic commerce by the
throat and extort outrageous prices from
the people. Il cannot do it. There is
none. They are ali of republican and
pro,ectionist origin.
Moreover, the Press cannot point to any
effort of republicans to enforce laws
against trusts. A democratic government
of New York drove the sugar trust from
that state. democratic government in
New Jersey is prosecuting the tobacco
trust A democratic government in Hi
nois is proceeding against the Pullman
monopoly. And the last republican ad-
ministration of the nation dismissed the
proceedings that had been instituted
against the whisky trust. The republican
party has never done anything to restrain
much less destroy trusts On the con-
trary. when the Mckinley bill was under
consideration, they were all invited to
come to Washington and fix the tariff
schedule TO suit themselves, and they ac-
cepted the invitation.
Moreover, the census returns show the
concentrating effect of republican govern
ment and its destructive effects on small
and independent business enterprises. The
decade from 1870 to 1880 is claimed to be
! one Of great prosperity, but in that de-
cade. although the capital invested in
manufactures increased 80 per cent, the
! number Of manufactures increased only
252, las TO 259,S52, or less than L per cent.
| Small establishments were crushed out Of
existence all over the country. In Indi-
ana, although the increased investment in
manufactures was over S13,6OO, 900, the
number Of manufactures fell from 1LS47
to II 1913. Nor was this state alone. There
was an actual decrease in number of
manufactures in Connecticut, Delaware,
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maine. Michigan. Mississippi, Missouri,
Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico,
Ohio Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Vermont,
Virginia and West Virginia. No more
convincing evidence could be given Of the
monopolistc tendencies Of protection
than a comparison Of the census figures
Of 1870 and 1880. It is too late now for
republicans TO profess hostility to the
trusts they created. The facts are on rec
ord, and they cannot be blotted out