New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-06-01

viii have ample time to discuss and pass upon II,
This is radical action I inclined to criticise
1t when the Democratic leader. Mr. Bryan sug
gested ii at Chicago. [ criticised II undemo-
cratic Since that time Mr.. Bryan has remained
silent. but we are here submitting it, You
Republican applause)
Mr.. Bailey. Texas reDlied 70 Mr. Grosvenor.
The gentleman from Ohio, he said asked the
House and the country indorse this refusal to
permit amendment. Dealing with a great and
comparatively issue. fairness demanded that
the minority should not only be allowed. but should
be invited. offer their plan for suppression
of the great evil. that the country could
which was the wiser and safer remedy The cOun-
try would understand that this a play
for partisan advantage You have real pur-
pose 10 dissolve destroy trusts" ne said 'ad-
dressing the Republican side. IF you insist
your amendment you know II will never become
part of the Constitution. There two ~
encouraging crime-one is to close your % 10
existence and the other TO offer impracticab bic
obstacle You using the latter method YOU
understand its purpose have sometimes doubted
your sincerity I have even doubted your political
integrity. Some Of you be hypocrites. some
rascas. but none of you fools" Mr. Rai
leys concluding sentence greeted with pro
longed Democratic applause.
PARTY RECORDS CONTRASTED
Mr. Dalzen closed the debate for the majority
No political party and no individual who not
against trusts he said. had a future. This utter
ance was greeted with jeers from the Democratic
side. The difference between the three political
parties. he continued. that the Democratic and
Populistc parties confined their opposition 20
speechmaking while the Republican party believed
in legislation. Republican applause and renewed
Democratic 1eers) The Republican party placed on
the statute books in 1890 the Sherman Antitrust
law The Democrats into power in 1892
platform containing a strong plank against trusts,
but for four years they did nothing Their Execu-
tive did take steps 10 enforce the law the
Republicans had put upon the statute books The
great Populist-Democratic leader at Chicago de-
clared that constitutional amendment should be
passed giving Congress the power TO regulate trusts.
Yet when come here" said he, with that
remedy, the leader the other side appeals to his
colleagues 70 stand together against IL You charge
with bad faith. You say that constitutional
amendment that infringes the power of the States
should be passed. Your objection is the
form. but 10 the substance II the
TO be frightened the prospect of this legislation
ii is because they know that between them and II
stands the Democratic party in solid phaIanx. You
believe in demagogy upon the stump: believe
N effective legislation upon the statute books
prolonged Republ spplause)
Mr.. Richardson before the vote was taken on
the adoption of the rule attempted to offer motion
to reconmit. but Mr.. DaIzeI made a point of order
against Il, and was sustained by the Speaker The
the rule adopted. IA TO rs II was a strict
party vote with the exception OF Mr. Mann. CT
Illinois, who voted with the Democrats against the
The minority amendments TO the bill then
debate on the resolution formally opened by
equally divided Mr. Raw 10 control the time For the
ma ioritv and Mr. TaTrv Of Arkansas the rankinr
minority member of the committee. for the oppo-
CHAIRMAN RAYS ARGUMENT
Nj Rays argument followed the lines OF his re-
port. He said that the proposition Of the minority
TO write into the Constitution something that
already there was ridiculous The power to regu-
late corporations engaged in interstate commerce
already existed If the proposition of the minority
ela ha ii moi rrooyr yvr-Ea
was. The people had felt the sting Of the trust
evil They had cried aloud for relief. They had
appealed TO State Legislatures, and twenty-seven
fectve anti-monopoly legislation, but If the Of
the toTty-ve states were uniform. and if Congress
Rw65iS SIN IN pe5sE5 hsIrn4pg wltn them 1t
amendment TO relieve the people. If the resolu-
the Democrats The Republicans had only eighteen
majority and II required two-thirds vote pass
must answer for it at the polls
MI Terry followed on behalf Of the minority. He
expressed regret that in grave issue the
Republican party had seen fit TO present a constf-
Il never could be Incorporated in the Constitution
The question, he said, had been treated. from
the broad point of view of patriotism, but from
that Of party expediency II there was sincere
desire to adopt a constitutional amendment why
he asked had the very drst section been so worded
as 70 make every Democrat who voted for f sub
scribe to the doctrine that the Constitution did
12ow the nag Wy submit such an entangling
there was ample authority without constitutional
amendment TO suppress trusts. The very power in
made goods within the police powers OF the States
7 told my colleagues - tnterposed Mr. Raw that
Ihat OH, II II became law. would be declared
Was it not passed in good faith" inquired Nj
Terry. DID you not vote for If? If Congress
pace convict made goods under the control Of
States 4 can place trust made goods under similar
control Democratic applause)
the legal and constitutional phase Of the power of
congress to regulate trusts without further con-
Mr.; Lanharn. OF Texas. occupied the remainder Of
n he res
Al sos p. m the House took a recess until
o'clock, when the debate continued
sULzFR AND THE ICE TRUST
The chief feature Of the night session arose out of
a fiery speech made by Mr. Sulzer. OF New-York.
against trusts Mr.. Sulzer charged that the Re
publicans were trying to deceive the people with
pretence Of legislation against trusts. IF had
been running this side of the House. said he ad-
dressing the other side Il should have joined with
you IN passing this resolution. Il would then have
to the Senate where your trust Senators
would have buried it, they buried the resolution
we sent them for amendment to elect Senators
by direct vote of the people"
The gentleman from New-York." interrupted Mr.
Ray, 'decIaims against trusts But he is a mem
Der Of Tammary Hall. which is running the New
York Ice Trust"
Mr.. Ray had read newspaper editorial describ-
ing the confusion into which the disclosures rela-
tive 10 the Ice Trust had thrown the Democratic
leaders in NewYork- This aroused the wrath Of
Mr. Suzer. who replied that it humiIatng to
hear Mr.. Ray plead as justification for the fraud
and humbug the Republican party were trying to
fOist the country the fulmina lions Of a news
paper clipping against the Ice Trust. Seven-teuths
OF the stockholders Of that trust, he declared
machine Republicans.
Why don't you freeze them out?" asked Mr..
Mercer, of Nebraska, amid laughter
Nj sulzer proceeded 70 say that the Republican
posed 70 IT, as they were opposed to the Coal trust
the Sugar Trust and all other He followed