The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1900-07-27

| and the Spanish war are the three great
! epochs in our history The frs. gave
birth to the republic, the second estab-
| lished its vitality, and the third extended
| its blessings to distant cines and distant
| peoples. The Revolutionary war had lis
| George Washington, the Civil war is
! Lincoln, and the Spanish war its Ne
| kinley The task Of our president has
been Herculean, but he has acquitted him
| self CT the same as a giant among the
| foremost statesmen of the world He has
| acquitted himself of the same in the
| spirit of our great republic and as became
| its foremost citizen. There We're men
| that were blind and could not see in
| the days of George Washington and
| Abraham Lincoln, as there are to-day.
| but the record made will stand, for the
present as for the past, an imperishable
monument to the American people and
| their great statesmen.
Next to their love for free silver and
| their dread of imperialism the Demo-
Gratis claim is their hostility to trusts,
monopolies and unlawful combinations
They not only assume to be the great
antitrust party, but they charge us with
undue friendship for the trusts. Unfor-
tunately for the Democratic party, the
facts fail to support their contention.
There are but three acts in our federal
statutes that relate in any way to trusts,
monopolies and unlawful combinations.
The first Of these is the so-called inter-
state commerce law of 1SS7-passed by a
Democratic house and a Republican SEN
ate. In the nature of the case, it's anti
trust provisions are limited to common
carriers engaged in interstate commerce.
| Then there is the provision in the Demo-
cratic tariff act of 1894 prohibiting COM
binations between importers and others
in respect to imports, prices of the
same: and this was the limit of Demo-
cratic legislation, though they had con-
! troll of all departments of the govern
ment But the principal and only general
ard
comprehensive Antitrust Law.
! is the act of 1890, commonly called the
! Sherman law passed by Republican
congress. AS interpreted by the supreme
court of the United States, through a
Democratic chief justice and other judges
of the court, this law is good and valid
and covers pretty nearly the entire field
of federal jurisdiction. In it's interpreta-
ton of this act the supreme court holds
that, under the Constitution of the United
States, federal authority is limited to
commerce and traffic, between the sew
eral states, with foreign nations and with
Indian tribes, and with the territories Of
the United States: and that commerce or
traffic wholly within a state and begin
ming and ending there, and mere manu-
facture and production Invested of inter-
state traffic are not within the scope Of
federal legislative power. GU. S. VS..
Knight, 1876 L. s. Ours is dual govern
government is one of limited powers, pre-
scribed in the Constitution. The chief
legislative power for controlling and reg
ulating trusts rests with the several
states And there is only one of two ways
open to secure complete legislative relief
so far as such relief is possible-and that
is by getting every state in the Union to
pass a strong and perfect antitrust law,
supplemental to federal legislation, which,
owing 10 the varied and diversified in
dustries and interests of the several
states is difficult to accomplish; or else
by comforting upon the federal govern
ment, by constitutional amendment. great
er power and authority in the premises.
This last plan was attempted by the Re-
pubIicans in the house of Representatives
in the last congress. A bill for consti-
tutional amendment giving the federal
government greater power to regulate and
control trusts, monopolies and unlawful
combinations, was introduced by Re-
publican member and put to a vote, but
failed to get the required two-thirds vote,
although the Republicans voted for it in
a body. because nearly the entire Demo-
cratic vote was solidly against 1t. On this
occasion their old-t time idol of state rights
stood between the Democratic party and
their assumed hostility to trusts. The
house of representatives also passed at
the last session of congress, under the
auspices of the Republican party, a bill
to enlarge, improve and strengthen the
remedial features of the Sherman law. 1t
came to the senate too late to be acted
upon at that session, but L have no doubt
it will be taken up and duly considered
and acted on at the next session OF con-
| gress. Here then, is the federal legis-
latve
Record of the Two Parties.
"The Republicans passed the Sherman
law, passed a bill through the house to
Fstrengthen this law and made thorough
| effort to pass a constitutional amend
ment to confer greater and much needed
| power upon the federal government for
the control and regulation of trusts The
| Democrats on the other hand, passed the
tariff act of 1894, embracing the antitrust
provision as to importers and imports,
| and opposed en- masse the passage OF the
| constitutional amendment which l have
| referred to- And both parties Joined In
passing the interstate commerce law
From this statement it is plain that, In
the matter of antitrust legislation, the
balance is largely in favor of the Re-
publican party, and that outside of their
| platform the Democrats make the poor
| est kind of showing, and that, whatever
| may be their attitude on trusts in gen.
eral, there is one trust they have warm
! side for and that is the silver trust.
"But must pause. have made these
brief and perfunctory remarks to brush
| away some of the Democratic cobwebs
| that lie in the pathway of our honored
guests-the National Republican league.
| The league and it's work are not strang-
ers to the Republicans of Minnesota.
| They will look to the efforts and CO.
| operation of the league for assistance In
| +ba GREAT mission of ReDublicaniSm, in