The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1899-09-26
cockran and Bryan.

Attorney General Gaither,of Mary
land a Republican, who wss one
of Mary lands delegates to the con-
ference op trusts, held at Chicago
recently, speaking of the proceed ngs
of the conference says:
the greatest popular interest in
the doings of the conference centred
around the addresses of Col. William
Jennings BRYAN and Hon. BOurke
Cochran. By general consent
it was assumed that Mr. Cock
ran would occupy an opposite
position upon the question to Colo.
mel Bryan, and such in reality was
the result of their joint debate, al
though Mr.. COCHRAN endeavoced to
make it appears that be was in sub
stantisl agreement with COlOne
Bryan.
"Mr. Cockran's speech.was au at
tempt to prove that no dangers at
present existed from the great growth
of trusts or combinations in trade,
because of the fact that there
was no exclusive monopoly granted
to such trusts by law. He insisted
that no trust could have monopoly
of the market unless such monopoly
was created by the excellence of its
product or service, and that every
business combination was subject to
either actual or potential competition
The weakness, in my opinion, in mis-
argument was in his failure to recog-
nize some of the evils from the pres.
ent organization of trusts, which are
quite apparent.
"On the other hand, the speech of
Mr.. Bryan was masterpiece OF IN
passioned oratory, which was thor
oughly appreciated by the great con-
course of his admirers. No one can
question Mr.. Bryan's sincerity and
great oratoricsl ability. The remedy,
however, which was proposed by him
was very radical, and the picture OF
absolute monopoly which be por'
trayed as existing at tthe present time
in the commercial. world does not. as
a mstter of fact, exist. If we were
in the clutches of monopolies such as
we're portrayed by him, one might
agree to almost any remedy which
would be proposed even to the ex
tent Of annihilation.
"The uncertainty expressed by
Colonel Bryan as to whether his
proposed remedy was constitutional
or not also renders his suggested
remedy of little calue. Public opin-
ion is seldom aroused to the same
height upon the same subject upon
two occasions. If an act of Congress
dealing with this subject of trusts
should be finally declared unconsti-
tutionsl, the people would accept the
decision with the desdening senti-
ment that was felt at the decision of
the income tax cases by the Supreme
Court.
San amendment to the Constitu.
ton comforting most ample powers
upon Congress to deal with this
question could be passed inn medi
ately if the people desired it.
We could then safely consider
the experience of the next few years
as to the outcome Of this great indu /:
trial evolution before adopting such
rem sdies as might be necessary.
"Two things have been promptly
demonstrated at the conference. One
that the trusts are not the absolute
monopolies that their enemies have
pictured them to be, and the other,
that the formation of trusts in pro
ductive of certain evils whose hnal
effect cannot at this time be ac'
eurately estimated. With these two
facts established the education dis
eussion Of the future of trusts and OF
the rem sdies to be applied can be
carried on more effectively and with
every prospect of successful re
| .s.1f ~