The daily morning journal and courier., 1900-05-02
FORGED A VOTE ON TRUSTS
SENATOR BERRY,S AMENDMENT TO
 THE MILITARY BILL.
Supplies from Any Recognized Trust Defeated bya Vote of go to IS in the Senatc-The Measure Provides Moro Than $14 1000, 900 for Supplies.

Washington, May 1.-During th greater part of the senates session to
 day the army appropriation bill, carry ing supplies for the military of nor,
 than $114000,000, was under considera
 tion. The feature of the discussion O.
 the measure was a debate on trusts pre- l cipitated by an amendment offered bJ
 Mr. Berry, dem., of Arkansas, provid' ing that the quartermaster's depart
 ment should not purchase supplies from
 any recognized trust.
 MT. Sewell of New Jersey inquired
 what MT. Berry meant by trust. What
 were commonly known as trusts, ht said, had in many instances proved tc
 be public benefactors. He designated | the Standard oil company and the
 American Sugar Refining company as 1 two combinations which had cheapened their products to the people. This pop ulistic sentiment" about trusts, he said
 was the adoption of the small ways of the past of transacting business. | MT. Berry said the trusts were the l greatest question before the country Many republican leaders were opposed to them. Mir Hawley opposed the | amendment. The war department had no option but to buy from the cheapest bidder. MT. Stewart said most of the arguments against trusts had been per fectly wild and crazy" and the propos- cd amendment was one of them. MT. Pettigrew attacked MT. Sewelps statement that the trusts were benefac- tors, including the sugar trust, and had cheapened products. He produced fig ures which, he maintained, showed that neither of the great corporations mem tioned really had cheapened their pro- ducts, their action at all times being d. rected toward the crushing out of com petition.
 Mr Stewart maintained that the only remedy for trusts was competition. He said there were combinations of capital that were bad and others that were good. Mir Teller asked: will the sem ator tell us what is the difference be- tween good trusts and bad trusts?"
 "The senate of the United States Is a trust replied Mir Stewart. land, be- lieve, good one" (IAughter.) Some of the trusts, he said, we're monopolies and they were bad The line Of denar- cation between bad trusts and good ones was difficult to find. "But," said he, "leave competition untrammelled and the people will rid themselves of all bad trusts"
 MT. Teller believed that it was desir- able that the trust question should be dealt with by the states, but the diffi- culty was that many legislatures were controlled by the trusts. National leg. islation of a kind that could or would be enforced was therefore desirable. "If the Sherman act was enforced as it should be there would be no such hue and cry about trusts" said MT. Teller MT Teller added that 1t was desirable that proper corporations should not be made to suffer.
 The amendment offered by MT. Berry was defeated. IS to 29 as follows:
 Yeas-Bacon Bate, Berry, Butler, Clay, Davis, Harris, Heitfeld, Jones of Arkansas, Kenney, McEnery, Money, Pettigrew. Pettus, Taliferro. Teller, Turner and Wellington-1S.
 Nays-Aldrich, Bard, Carter, Chand- Ter, Elkins, Fairbanks, Foraker, Frye, Gallinger, Hawley, Hoar, Jones of Ne vada, Kean, Lodge, McBride, McComas, Penrose, Perkins, Platt of Connecticut, Proctor Ross, Scott, Sewell, Shoup, Si- mon, Stewart, Warren, Wetmore and Wolcott-29.
 After having been under consideration more than two months the Alaskan civil code bill was passed to-day.