The Chanute times. [volume] (Chanute, Kan.) 1897-1913, 1900-03-02

are C0ursing through the channels OF
trade, supported by the sublime conf
dence In the Republican party, giving
us splendid prosperity, helping the
countless sons of toll I'm the multiplied
fields Of labor.
TRUSTS.
'Mr Bryan charges that the Repub.
lican party is fostering trusts. would
ask what has he or his party ever done
against trusts? What did the Demo-
cratic party do when in power to
break up the trusts? What measure
did Bryan propose or advocate when
he was in congress against trusts? He
tells us now what should be done. 1
answer, what did he do or attempt to
do when he was in position to act?
Trusts were organized several years
ago in this countr,; they were regard
ed as dangerous and legislation was
begun against them. The first anti
trust law was enacted by the Kansas
legislature in 1889. | framed and pre-
sented the bill; the legislature that
passed 1t was well nigh unanimously
Republican. Shortly thereafter many
other states, and congress as well,
passed similar laws. COngIe ess was Re-
publican when the anti-tI ust bill was
passed. If it was not sufficient Bryan
ought to have had it amended while
he was in congress. Prosecutions were
begun under these laws and it drove
the trusts to change their organiza-
tiunS from trusts to single corpora
tiUnS, so that now, what are common
ly called trusts are in fact private
corporations. Bryan says that all
trusts are bad. That is equivalent to
saying shat all corporations are bad.
| do not believe him. | believe there
are bad corporations as there are bad
men and that there are good corpora
lions as there are good men. L be-
iieve that there are many corporations
that are pursuing their respective
business legitimately to the benefit OF
their owners and the public with
whom they deal. ] believe also that
there are many bad corporations which
seek TO restrain trade, break down
competition, advance prices beyond
legitimate profit in order to swell
dividends on watered stock. The good
corporations | would encourages: the
bad corporations l would control or
destroy. Mr.. Bryan is like the bear
who saw fly on the babY's nose and
struck with all the might Of his great
arm to destroy the fly. He killed the
fly and the baby, too. No rational
mar would destroy all corporations.
1t is only by combinations of capital
into corporations that many enter
prises can be carried forward.
IMPERIALISM.
/ '.Mr. Bryan says that our acquiSl-
tion and retention of the Philippine
islands is in violation of the Declara-
tion of Independence and that 1t will
bring an army of Malays under the
American flag in competition with
American labor, and that this is an
other way the Republicans have OF eX-
altiDg the dollar above the man. All
| this and more too has been said of
every acquisition of territory that has
ever been acquired. There is no more
reason for Supposing that the Filipino
will ever be able to compete with the
American working man in the future
than did the AborigineeS of the north
west compete with American labor
after Jefferson bought Louisiana. Nor
was the Declaration of Independence
any more violated in the acquisition
of the Philippine archipelago than
when the great author of that Declar-
alton acquired an empire beyond the
Mississippi. Bryan has shifted his
position on the question of expansion.
He stood against our taking Puerto
Rico as he had stood against our an
neXation of Hawaii. But now he
claims that there is vast difference
| between expansion and imperialism
and accuses us of trying to hide be-
hind the word expansion. Mr.. Bryan,
it seems, does not fully understand
the meaning of expansion. Expansion
| is not alone the acquisition of terri
tory; iU is far more than tnat. 1t is
the extension Of superior over an in
ferior civilization. We have not eX-
tended into Canada, because Canada
has civilization like our own, but we
have expanded snuthward, because
the civilization in that direction is
inferior to ours. We took In Texas,
New Mexico and California and the
Gadsden purchase and we have stop
ped only because of the promise of
Mexico toward higher and better
civilization. There can be no arrest
of our national life; there can be no
dTT6SU VI Jul AdOiOudl BiOWOh. tnOiO
can be no arrest Of our national eX-
pansiOn until we begin to decay. Mr..
Bryan says every case Of expansion
should stand upon its own merits, and
that no country should be acquired
without the consent of the people of
that country. If the entire history
of the Democratic party in its days of
glory and power did not stand against
Mr.. Bryan on the proposition, it is
enough for us to know that the Phil
ippine islands for hundreds of years
belonged to Spain; that Spain ceded
them to us by treaty; the treaty has
been ratified by both countries and
they are rightfully ours. What shall
we do with them? is the question.
Keep them, is my answer. As TO what
govei nment they shall have, that is a
problem to be solved in the future.
The reason why we should keep them
is, first, because it is better for them,
and next, because 1t is better for US.
The war with Spain came at time
when we were ready to extend our
commerce on the sea. For two cen
turies we had expended our energies
on the land. Labor and capital had
at last banded the country together