The Cape Girardeau Democrat. (Cape Girardeau, Mo.) 1876-1909, 1899-09-23
COCHRAN ON TRUSTS.
The Eloquent New Yorker Ana
lyzes the Trust Question.
He Suggests that the Remedy for the Evil
Lies In Forcing Public Corporations
To Make Their Business
An Open Book.

SiiiScSo, otpI. 1o.-luc cApSCtCu
Joint debate between William j. Bry-
an, of Nebraska, and Bourke Cochran,
of New York, before the Civic Fedora
ton conference on trusts and corpora
tons, did not take place at Central
music hall last night, as announced,
for the reason that Mr.. Bryan declined
TO participate in the debate, claiming
that the committee had misunderstood
him ia regard to the matter. He,
however, agreed to speak at the fol-
lowing days session. Mr.. Cochran,
therefore, had the platform to himself,
and talked on the subject of Trusts
and Corporations" for two hours. Fol-
lowing is a synopsis of his address:
Mr.. Cockran's Address.
The precise question which we have
been called to consider is the effect on the
general prosperity OF The community Of
combinations whether of capital or of
labor. One of the great difficulties in a
philosophical inquiry is the use of vague,
SonorouS and misleading phrases, which
raise clouds of passionate defamation
about the difficulty Of the problem. OBJ
securing its outlines and even magnifying
its dimensions. Such words have figured
so much in the controversies over the
tutoAAOL liAil L lllo SWAT IiiiNuil AZ bAo-
GUESSING the facts which confront us on
account of certain words which excite US.
daughter and applause.)
For the purpose of establishing an in
telligent basis of discussion, somewhat
free from these terms over which men
have become moved 10 passionate decla-
abundance of commodities fairly dis
tributed among those who produce them.
There can not be abundant production
of commodities without an extensive dis
me- ~ thn-, ~ shA TOWN., Of nDa in
a country wherein prosperity is based up
on freedom. Applause.)
There can not be any distribution II
there is not production, and there can not
be an extensive distribution unless there
is abundant production. We must have
commodities to distribute before we can
distribute them in the form of wages or
Of profits.
There are some combinations which
operate to reduce prices, ard some which
operate to increase them. Now, If l ac-
cept either | should offend against hat
other offender of which 1 complain. 1t
will be Idle to say that some improve,
some raise prices md some depreciate
them if we did not prescribe some test
the two.
Test Proposed.
1.-The test is to ascertain whether the
combination OF capital floII ishes through
government aid or without it, for, my
friends, you must see that any industrial
enterprise which dominates the market
without aid from the experiment. must do
SO through cheapeninE the product, or. as
1t is commonly called. ny undersellinS
competitors. An industry which at one
and the same time reduces prices and
swells its own profits mI:st accomplish
that result by increasing the volume of
its production. tApplauSe.) On the other
hand, an industry '!hich dominates the
market by the favor of government, d.
rect or indirect, can not, in the nature OF
things, be forced to cnedpen prices, be-
cause if it could dominate the market by
underseiling competitors N an open field
without favor, it would not need the gov
eminent favor. CApplluSe.)
The Interference nj the government
would be an injury and NOS Il benefit to it.
An industry or combination of capital, or
anything you may choose &c call it, that
dominate Il market through Il restricted
competition, that delivers to the con-
sumner on its own terms, necessarily de-
ponds on Il narrow nutprt and large
profits, eXtorted, not from the eXCellency
OF its service, but from the neiPiessness of
those with whom it ceais. tAppIause)
Now there are three ways in which the
government interfcreS in the trade of in
dividuals i'll this country. One is by patent
law.
The other means by which the govern
ment interfercs is by tariff. 1t operates to
restrict competition in the production of
any article, 20 those engaged in it in this
country.
But if a trust or combination is to be
formed marifCstly ii aids the enterprise
where the field of cOmprtiii5n is originally
limited. Under a condition of free trade
every article which is produced is ex-
pOS8d to the competition of the whole
world. If You rely on the combination To
suppress competition. mdnifestly it is
easier to make 4 combination between the
producers in one country than in all coun-
tries. and to that extent tariff favors
them. IApplause.) But 1t Is claimed that
the exclusion of foreign competition in
some way or other develops "A domestic
competition much Keenar, IN some mys-
fpTlOlIS methods more hprPtIppDt dO mt
understand this logic
Public Franchies.
There is still a third and serious ques-
ton with which | think We can deal and
which | believe is yasrly more extensive
in its results than this ta!if in favor OF
trusts. | refer to those tavors which are
extended to certain industries or great
corporations enjoying government fran
ment agencies, because their stock Is
owned by private individuals.
And here we are face 10 face with a
serious difficulty. First, l must assume
1t a serious difficulty because it is almost
impossible to describe il. 1t IS surrounded
by secret. That it does exist everybody
.sophical discussion, it is impossible to try
to follow that which you can not fully
describe, and the worst feature. there |
fore, of this outrage which it perpetrates
against a certain class of rhe
is that 1t is shroUded in mystery.
mo person can enjoy Il favor at the
hands of any company srloying a public
franchise except at The expense of an
other. Government can not create any
thing. Now, if government can not create |
anything, it has nothing of it's own to be- |
stew. If 1t undertakes to enrich one in |
dividual, the thing it gives to him it must
from another. :ADDlauSe)
IF one person attainS rates hat are eS-
pecially favorahle; If his goods are trans |
ported at a loss, why, other men using
same facility must make good the
loss.
What is the remedy? 4 simple one, I !
Some gentlemen have suggested
municipal owner ship. l have no quarrel
with the principle of the municipal owner |
ship. j concede the principle OF it. The
has no right to empower any
private agency to perform a function I'M |
less it be one which the government
would be bound itself to perform If that
agency Were not to be found. (Applause.l
question of municipal ownership is a |
mere question of eXpediency. / won't de- |
bate ii here for the reason that IL 1t be a |
remedy 1t is such a remote one that a dis.
cussion of it would be Il discussion of the
of our children rather than of
daughter and &pplause.)
There are riany grave questions to be |
considered before municipal ownership |
could be reduced to practical operation, |
though We would now set about the !!
task. |
Remedy SuEH ested.
Now is there any practical remedy that
his conference can suggest that can be
put in force tomorrow by 1ny Legislature /
that happens to be in session? MY friends.
Il seems to ne to be a very simple matter
The remedy is simply to define a prac.tcaI
a serious one, and then provide
for publicity and provide the prODer stot- ]