The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-09-17

the uses and abuses of trusts CLOSED
it's session here today in blaze of ora
| tory, in which Colonel w. J. Bryan anC
w. Bourke Cochran were the centra
| figures. Mr.. Cochran followed the not
ed Nebraskan, but disclaimed any in
| tention of debating the conclusions o.
his immediate predecessor, and declar'
ing his complete concurrence in mucI
more than Mr.. Bryan had said.
| The westerner had delivered the
speech of the day during the forenoon
amid frequent interruption of tumul-
tuous applause. Mr.. Foulke of Indi-
ana, commenting on the speech, made
assertions which Mr.. Bryan desired
further to discuss. He was requested
to take the stage and complied, for the
second time facing a wildly enthusiast
tic house.
At the conclusion, Mr.. Cochran arose
and observed: lust few words"
The spectators wanted more and re-
fused TO subside until he had taken the
platform. He agreed with Mr.. Bryan
he said, but he wanted information.
The crowd which greeted Colonel
Bryan when the doors were thrown
open amounted almost to mob. Cen
trail Music hall was damned from pit to
gallery with admirers of the Nebras-
kan.
Then the Crowd Left.
When he had concluded his speech 50
per cent of the audience departed
leaving a few struggling spectators &c
listen to the remaining speakers and the
report of the committee on resolutions.
Ex-Governor Luce of Michigan was
chairman of this committee, and he
rigidly adhered to the resolutions passed
yesterday, in which it was resolved that
no resolutions giving the sentiment OF
the conference on the trust problem
should be presented or considered.
Mr.. Keasley of New Jersey, a MEM
Der of the committee, declared that he
had spoken with Colonel Bryan, and
that the latter had given it as his opin-
ion that the nature of the conference
made discussions expressive of senti-
ment on the problem out of place. He
proposed that to the original resolu-
tions be added something to the effect
that the conference has been of benefit
to the delegates, had cleared their
minds of many doubts and enlightened
their understandings. These resolutions
were not considered. The decision OF
the committee as submitted in Chair
man Luce'S report was unanimously
adopted, as was a motion put before
the house thanking the Civic Federation
for its entertainment of the delegates
Many Other Speakers.
Other speakers during the day were
J. H. Raymond, G. w. Northrup. ir.
Professor David Kinley, T. b. Walker
w. w. Howe, ex-senator Blair of New
Hampshire, Attorney General T. S.
Smith of Texas, ]. 3. Dill, A Copeland
w. d. Foulke, while many others took
part in the discussion which closed the
conference.
1t was decided those who had pre-
pared, but who had not been allowed
owing to the limitation of the pro-
gramme, to read speeches, should de-
liver them into the hands of Secretary
Easley to be published in book form
together with those which had been de-
iivered from the stage.
At the adjournment many of the anti
trust delegates met in the Sherman
House to formulate resolutions ex-
pressive of their views:
Colonel Bryan was introduced by
Governor Stanley of Kansas who acted
as chairman of the opening session.
Colonel Bryan said:
Colonel Bryan's Speech.
"The trust question has grown in i'm
portance. Within the past two years
we come to consider the Capitalization
and the magnitude of the interests in
Volved, than were organized in all their
previous history of the country, and
the people now stand face to face with
this question: Is the trust a blessing
of a curse?
IF curse, what remedyacan be ap-
piled to the curse? / want to start
with the declaration that monopoly in
private hands is indefensible from any
standpoint and intolerable. One trust
may be less harmful than another. One
trust magnate may be more benevolent
than another, but there is no good mo-
nopoly in private hands, and l do not
believe it is safe for society to permit
any man or group Of men to monopolize
any article of merchandise or any
branch of business.
The defense of the monopoly is al
ways placed on the ground that if you
will allow people to control the market
and fix the price they will be good TO
the people who purchase them. The
entire defense of the trusts rests upon
money argument. If the trust will
sell to man an article for a dollar
less than the article will cost under
other conditions then, in the opinion
OF some, that proves a trust to be a
good thing.
Price Will Not Be Reduced.
I'm the first place, deny that under
a monopoly the price will be reduced
In the second place.. if under a monopo-
ly the price is reduced, the objections
to a monopoly from other standpoints
far outweigh the financial Advantage
that the trust would bring
I'm the early years of Lincoln's adj
ministra ton he sent a message to con-
gress, and in that message he warned
his countrymen against the approach
of monarchy He said it was the at
tempt to- put capital upon an equal
footing with, if not above, labor in the
structure of government, and in that
attempt he saw the approach of NOM
archy. Lincoln was right. Whenever
you put capital on an equal footing
with@labor or above labor in the struc-
ture of government you are on the
road to aiding a government that resfS
not upon reason, but upon force.
Nothing is more important than
that we shall in the beginning rightly
understand the relation between money
and man.
Purpose of Trusts.
What is the purpose of trusts or the
monopoly? For when l use the word
trust I use it in the sense that the
word means monopoly. and what is the
purpose of monopoly?
THE first advantage of a monopoly
is to lower the price of the raw mate
rial furnished By the people to that
combination.
1.-The next thing is. after you have
bought up all the factories, to close a