The people's journal. (Pickens, S.C.) 1891-1903, 1899-10-05
TUE TRUST CONFEREN CE.

The outcome of the recent Trust
Conference in Chicago will be disap-
pointing to many by reason Of the TACT
that nc plan was proposed by which
trusts could be regulated, or, if neces
| sary, abolished; the convention taking
The gi ound that it had no right to take
stand upon the subject. While, OF
cOulsc, it is understood that the con-
! vcntion could do nothing that would
} have any binding effect upon parties or
: people, 1T would not have been uncXpcct-
ed, or beyond the scope of the purpose
for which it was called together, after
} four days of talk and debate, for it to
have formulated some plan or made
some suggestions on the question
which Is of such absorbing interest to
the people Of the United States. We
suspect that the disappointing outcome
was the result more of politics than
any doubt on the part of the convcn-
ton of its power TO advise. With one
Presidential possibility actively cngag
cd in its proc ecdiDgs, and representa-
tivcs of the two great political parties
sparring for points, and to prevent one
party from getting advantage of the
|
have been looked for. We believe,
plishcd in the line of agitation. and
further in the amplilicotion of the fact
that the political parties will only take
action on the subject as they are COM
pcllcd to by the people. We have no
doubt that both parties will vigorously
dcnouncc trusts in their platform.
Talk is cheap. But no decided, effect
i've action will be takcn ~ either of
the parties, except as crystalzcd pub
lie sentiment compcls them to.
The main speeches in the convcn-
ton were made by W. J. Bryan and
Burke Cochran, and it Is intel csting to
note that while these leading represent
tativcs of two diverse wings in one of
the great political parties, disagreed us
TO methods, they agreed rs TO The right
Of the people TO regulate the trust; and
regulation means much, when properly
interpreted and applied. Mr.. Cochran
would look to the State Legislatures
FOR the power Of regulation, while Mr..
Bryan would appeal to both the Nation
and the States. The latlcr's plan in
substance is as follows:
First-That the State should have
the right to create whatever private
, corporations the people of the State
l think best.
Sccond-That the State has, or
should have, the right to impose such
I limitations upon an outside corporation
l as the people of the State may think
5 necessary for their protection. That
C protects the rights of the pcople of the
Il State to say, first. what they shall or
l. yauiZe in their State as a corporalion
II and, second, what they shall hermit as
q a CORPORATION TO come from other States
Q who DO business in their State.
Third That the Federal govern,
Il ncut ha. OF should have the riuht f.
it IMPOSE .uct. re- ricr.3n. :. C1,.3t5.s
j. may think uele--arv uDtn auy coryo.,
at,9u witch doe. business outside OF
+ he Stale IN r.Hh /. j.. or..ulZ.,!, r.
i .lth.r N4r..a. would nra:serve to the
: tcun.e II lie >aA1G =. Tie righta they
Z, n0w nave. Aaa 1E .nt, .Sacla time have
Il t.1y..Zre:.s. =.,atc..:,: 5. cp.currcnt remedy
J. lo ..@ claimant. ..: State remedy
Wien the :!::a. g3Ve:nment Ii
:: c@i!7':7 : c"'E}:&t.o4 To DO nu.Inca
= "ui-Ld: - TIE S,'t.: Ia "n!ch 1t was or
p -a"iZo4' II mere permits 1t 10 ITO bus
3: mess IN any state unier the condition
"a imposed oy the orISinaI charter.
Without lndorsiny these proposition
y we submit there are several good point
ct IN them that are worthy OF considera
Is rlon. They involve and conccdc tn
IT tight OF the government, State or Ma
cr uonal, to exercise such supcrvisio
over trusts as woulu eliminate all dan
it, gcrous or offensive features from them
tn such rs watering OF stock, secrecy o
operations, crushing or buying up op
sc position, and other methods by whicI
d. the trusts have attained their prcscn
Il enormous powers.
nos whose products come in connection will
,lf1 thc urnducis or other cnnntr;cs I'M,