Arizona republican., 1899-03-30
Their Existence Will Be Made
 a Party Issue.
ATTITUDE OF DEMOCRATS
They will Charge inc Protective Tariff with Being Responsible for inc Great Increase of Trusts Claim of Republicans fo be Thai Their Regulation is a naF- ter of State Legislation.

Washington, March % Politicians
 who begin to concern themselves at this season with party issues and po- litical questions of national interest are devoting a great deal of thought
 to the question of trusts, the popular
 term applied to combinations of cap
 ital and industry. One of the great parties is voluntarily taking up tho
 subject. Upon the other it is being
 pressed by force of circumstances. Thus the leaders in both parties. in
 their meetings and commingling at
 Washington, find this an absorbing
 topic of discussion.
 It is already apparent to politicians
 that the democrats will attempt to
 hold the republicans responsible for the enormous increase in cCnsolida-
 tions of various industrial organiza- tions. The party cry will be that they
 are made possible by a protective tar lff, while free trade or low tariff enact ment will be urged as one way to de-
 stroy the trusts. The fact that the greatest increase in trusts has oc- cured since the enactment of the
 latest tariff law will be advanced in evidence of the democratic proposition
 that the republican tariff is respon-
 sible
 Republican leaders, while not ad- mitting the latter claim, will not evade the issue, but will take it up for a diff
 ferent motive. It is acknowledged
 that the existence of trusts may be- come menace to the public welfare
 Any evil which threatens the people during a republican administration is fit subject for correction by the re- publican party and administration, will be the ground upon which the re- publican party will take up the ques- ton.
 The democrats will attempt to make trusts national issue. The indica- tions now are that the republicans while referring to the subject in na- tional convention, will take the posi- tion that the remedy in law lies with the states, and not with the federal government. The trusts against which the greatest complaints are now levied are those maintaining a monopoly of the manufacture of the necessaries of life. Such trusts are dis tinguished in the sight of the law from those which restrain interstate com merce, and it has been held that only to the latter does the existing federal antitrust law apply.
 Attorney-General Griggs, in a recent letter to a correspondent in New ter sey, called attention to the decision of the courts in the case of the United States against the sugar trust, in which the foregoing proposition was laid down as fact. Continuing, the at torney general said that all the combi- nations recently formed and now or ganizing are similar to the sugar trust and not within the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
 "If amenable to any law" wrote the they are amenable to the laws of the respective states.
 President Cleveland, in his message to congress in December, 1896, took the same position. He said that 'even though it may be found that the fed eral authority is not broad enough to fully reach the case, there can be no doubt of the power of the several states to act effectively in the prem ises"
 No one entertains for moment the idea that the republican party would hesitate to recommend action by the states limiting the scope and opera tions of trusts. The opinion has been by politicians in Washing ton recently that when the party i'll national convention assembled has made such a recommendation it will have met the issue raised by the dem- ocrats and have performed it's duty. Recourse can be had tci the decision of the courts to uphold the assertion that there is no Jurisdiction in the national legislature to correct existing evils.
 AS before stated, the claim that the protective tariff is responsible in measure for trusts will not Ee admit ted by the republican S. They will charge. it is said by some politicians, that it is the laxity of state laws which fosters trusts Witness the recent or Ninety per cent of them 1r more have been organized in New Jersey simply because a law was en- acted in New Jersey to permit such action. The laws of other states ren- Ter trust making more difficult, and in
 (Continued on Eighth Page.l