The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-02

Been Blessing to the Coun-
INSTRUMENTATION of MonopoIies.
During the discussion Of the Army Ap-
preparation bill in the Senate yesterday a
warm debate on the question of trusts
and monopoies was precipitated. The dis
cussion was brought about by the amend
ment proposed by Senator Berry. proyid-
ing that the Quartermaster's Department
be required to purchase articles needed
for the use Of the Army from dealers not
members OF any trust or combination.
After the Alaskan Code bill had been
disposed of Senator Proctor called up the
Army Reorganization bill After the SEN
ate had agreed to proceed with its con
sideraton on motion of Mr.. Proctor II was
laid aside and the Army Appropriation bill
was taken up. As passed by the House the
bill carried Sic. 1856. 1874 As reported TO
the Senate it carries Sll4.951 $50.
Mr. Stewart offered an amendment pro-
yiding that nothing in what is known as
the Foraker amendment to the Army ap-
preparation of 1899. prohibiting the grant
ing of franchises or concessions in Cuba,
shall be construed to apply to the landing
in Cuba OF submarine cables from the
United States or as authorizing the mill
tary authorities TO obstruct or prevent the
landing OF such cables"
His amendment further provides that the
Secretary of War be directed to grant 4
permit to the Commercial Cable Company
of Cuba to lay and operate a sub marine
cable from the coast of the United States
to Cuba, on the terms and conditions usual
in such cases.
In support of his amendment Mr.. Stew
art said it had never been intended that
the Foraker amendment should be con
strued by the War Department as sup
port of monopoly. He declared that every
commercial body in the United States had
asked Congress for permission TO land
additional cables in Cuba.
Senator Teller favored the amendment
Senator Plat of Connecticut made the
point Of order that it was general
legislation and could hardly be in
serted in an appropriation i'll. Sena-
tor Mason said that competition should be
granted in the telegraph business. lie
claimed that the construction OF the Fora
ker amendment by the military autho.l-
ties was very remarkable in that they held
that no other company could compete with
the Western Union Telegraph Company.
This is not new legislation be said,
"but a construction of legislation already
on the books. Today we are bowling to
the one monopoly, while the business men
Of the country are paying whatever this
company demands"
Mr.. Platt's point Of order was sustained.
and the Stewart amendment was laid over
until today.
MIR. Bcrry's Amendment.
Senator Berry offered the following
amendment to the section relating to The
Quartermaster' Department:
The ouartermaster's Department, in making
contracts and purchases OF articles and supplies
for the military service, shall give preference all
other things. including price and quality, being
equal. to articles OF the growth. production aud
manufacture of the United States, and as between
the producers. manufacturers, merchants. and
dealers Of the United States preference snail be
given. all other things including price ana qual-
ity being equal to those producers, minuidc-
furers. merchants. and dealers WHO are not mem
bcrs OF or in any way connected with any trust
or combine formed TO produce. manufacture. or
sell the articles which are being contracted for
and purchased by the Quarternaster's Deplrtm, ut
for the military service.
Senator SeweH then asked what was
meant by trusts Mr. Berry answered that
the iuterrogater ought to know. Senator
Sewel then began a defence Of the com
binations Of capital referred to as trusts,
stating that the combinations. including
the Standard Oil Company, have been
blessing to the country. and to curb them
would be to destroy the wealth OF the
United States.
Senator Berry denounced the trusts as
greedy corporations which had destroyed
competition and driven thousands of bust
ness men to suicide.
The trust question is the greatest prob
lem Of the day" he said. and We may
yet tight it out in this chamber. The Ohio
Republicans we're afraid to dodge the great
lion -baf, bax Cd hafr MI
form the other day, and yet there are men |
like the Senator from New Jersey who ask. |
What is meant by trusts?"
Senator Hawley stated that those who |
headed the trusts were not branded and !
were not marked people. He explained that /
the Quartermaster General was required by |
law to ask for bids. and could not refuse
an offer # il was the lowest and the goods /
the best.
Senator Stewart stated that be was very /
familiar with the trust question, and saw |
only one remedy-that of regulating the /
volume OF money. Legislation against |
trusts seemed useless since the combina- |
lions managed TO come out on top but if /
the volume Of money were regulated times +
would be good and the trusts would grow /
shaky and die.
Senator Berry read the Sherman act |
against trusts and combinations and stated /
that the Senate should not support criml-
nal corporations and should pass the
amendment
Senator Pettigrew denied that the trusts f.
had reduced the price Of any article. He I
stated that the price Of refined sugar had .
every year since the organization
of the Sugar Trust. Senator Stewart ar
gued against the amendment, but an
nounced that he would like to choke the
whole greedy octopus family which had
planted itself in the United States He
made an extended speech against both the
trusts and the amendment. stating that
he could not see remedy in the latter.
Senator Pettigrew denounced the Re
publican party for having fostered the
and classed Senator Stew
art as a Republican. lie related the eff
forts of the Democratic party to enact
legislation curbing them and told Of the
evils OF trusts.
Il believe that a remedy will be found
for these Illegal corporations" he argued.
but II will not be found until the Re
publican party, the nurse and fosterer OF
the combinations. is driven from power.
and a party Of. for. and by the people is
placed in control"
Senator Stewart answered that his rem
cdy was to produce enough legal tender
money TO cause good times and thus com
petition would destroy the trusts. He
argued al length on the matter until in
formed by Senator Pettigrew that he re
minded the latter OF a minister who
preached a sermon from the text " Why
stand ye here thus idly?' and then pro-
eeeded to elaborate by saying. why
stand? Why not sit? Why stand We?
Why don't ssme one else stand? Why
stand We here2 Why not stand some
ell So m t,-itb orr |