The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-09-27

plause.I
BUT ONE QUESTION TO DECIDE.
Now. have a. few words preliminary 10
The discussion. i do not propose to discuss
trusts as an economic question, or as a
financial question, or as proposition af-
fecting lily or otherwise the industries and
welfare of the great Republic. 1t is not nee
essary, because we all agree that there are
evils connected with trusts. The only ques-
ton before US is how We want to vote on
election day on this question, and L shall
discuss it as a political proposition.
should say first, however, that at the
present time-now--in the year 1900. the
business organization called trust does
rot. perhaps. have the sort of existence
that il had eight, ten, twelve or fourteen
years ago. Now a trust-using the Ian
guage accurately, and God forbid that L
should use IL otherwise when / refer TO the
speech of William Jennings Bryan, WHO
uses language both accurately and mac
curately Laughter and applauseJ, put,
using the language accurately, means SIM
Ply in the development OF our business IN
dustries that, say twelve years ago or
fourteen years ago, there were IN the
country very many what We call trusts,
and they were organized by corporations,
firms, individuals and associations Settins
together under what was called trust
agreement and vesting in a central COM
nIistee or board of directors the control OF
all the various businesses that were parties
10 the agreement. Now, that was, technl-
cally, a trust. These things do not exist u
any large extent to-day. In the course OF
development and evolution, what was the
trust ten or twelve years ago Is To-Day
gigantic corporation. For instance, the
Standard Oil trust at the period snail
discuss little later was vast trust; IL
included in its trust agreement something
like forty or fifty corporations, individuals
firm T0-6a
there is only one corporation ana all Oh
the forty have conveyed their properties 10
the individual corporation and they
ordinarily have ceased 10 exist as ieSdl
entities. but the same evil that existed
under the trust agreement exists to-day
Under the mammoth corporation-a corpo-
ration having a capitalization OF something
like a hundred millions of dollars.
ABOUT THE SUGAR TRUST.
1.-The sugar trust is precisely the same
way. 1t was first attacked by legislation
and by litigation. 1t was a trust pure and
simple. To-day it is mammoth corpora
ton, organized under the laws of New
Jersey with a capitalization of something
like seventy-five to a hundred million dol
lars. The whisky trust is precisely the
same and a large number of other cor
porations That now is the method of
organization. Now our Democratic friends
say that all corporations are bad and evil
Mr. Bryan said in his speech in st. Louis
to the commercial travellers that all cor
porations are bad, and he identified trusts
and monopolies with corporations. Now
when / do not agree with Mr.. Bryan i am
going to quote just moment from ms
speech on that questionable demagogic
attempt made by him in that speech TO ar
ray the people of the Republic against the
corporate interests of the Republic in the
interest of his candidacy for President OF
II from, xr.arx
briefly. Here was his statement: Those
who desire humiliation of trusts are not
hostile to property rights, but they protest
against allowing a fictitious person created
by law and called a corporation TO trample
upon the rights of natural man of flesh
and blood. If man-made corporation
supports the Republican party. we ought
to be able to appeal for support to the
GOd-made man. Now there he treats as
synonymous monopolies and trusts and
corporations and undertakes to array the
people of this great Republic against cor
porate interests. 1t is the most ineffable
twaddle that any man ever undertook to
deliver that was fit to be candidate Tor
the office of President of the United States,
and / submit il to be the most demagogic
| proposition that has yet been announced
| in this campaign, because where there is
| one corporation that is oppressive, that is
| a trust, that controls the price of products,
| that Expresses the people, or one syndicate
| or one aggregation of capital, there are
| thousands that are legitimate, proper. wise,
necessary and absolutely essential to the
| prosecution of the business of this great
| Republic and every intelligent Democrat
Democrats that are honest [laughter1-in
| this audience, every intelligent Democrat
| that is honest will admit that corporations
| are as L describe them.
CORPORATIONS ARE ESSENTIAL.
william Jennings Bryan himself knows
| that corporations are essential, necessary,
| wise and judicious in the main and that the
| only corporations that need to be attacked.
| that ought to be assailed in this campaign
| are the corporations that are injurious,
| but he insists that there is no distinction
| between corporate interests and makes this
| proposition for the purpose of arraying
| class against class, inflaming prejudice be-
/ tween the people of this country and the
| corporate, wealthy interests in the country,
| when he knows and you know that corpora
! lions and capital are dependent upon labor
| and that labor is dependent upon corpora
lions and capital. Without corporations
| and capital no labor would be employed,
| because nine-tenths of our business is con-
Quoted under these forms and properly
| and wisely so, and without labor corpora
tons with their capital could not find
1 profitable employment, and it is the duty
| of any man who undertakes to be states
| man to harmonic these interests rather
than undertake to jeopardize the welfare
| of the Republic by throwing a frebrand
| between them even in a political campaign.
| IGreat appiause.1 Now / want to demon
strate that have not misquoted his posi-
| ton or misstated the attitude that he sus-
tains in relation TO this. Those who at
tempt to divide private monopolies into
| good monopolies and bad monopolies will
never make any progress toward the over
| throw of trusts. There is no good monopoly
| In private hands, there never was and
there never will be. Now we have it,
| Every corporation represents and is
| synonymous with monopoly and there is
| no good monopoly-they are all bad-there-
| are all bad. Now, l do not agree with
1 that hysterical proposition. / do not APP
| proach the discussion of this question from
| that standpoint, / do not think that atti-
| tude is the proper one to be observed when
| we discuss a great economic proposition
or the attitude of the Republican and
| Democratic parties with reference there
| to-"
By the way of illustrating his point the
| speaker here related the story of the judge
| In southwestern Texas, who, under the
| influence of LIQUOR, charged the jury in a
4 suit against a railroad company, to the
| effect that the Democratic party is unalter-
| ably opposed to corporations. therefore,
laughter and applause.l
THE ATTITUDE OF BRYAN
| Continuing. Mr.. Littlefield said Now,
! protest against that attitude in this cam
/ paign. 1t is the attitude of Mr.. Bryan
| speech TO the commercial travellers: il is
| not the attitude that should be pursued
1 crba, <bic suac+fov ;o ha diSo,,ceoa f,~