Arizona republican., 1900-10-14

DEMO- and unlawful trade CRAFTS AND combinations was put
 TRUSTS. there by republicans.
 That there is not more stringent laws against them is the fault of the democratic party. The laH- occasion on which the parties. as represented in congress, went on rec ord on the trust question, was on June 1st, 1900. On that day q final vote was taken on a constitutional amendment 70 grant congress power to define regullle. prohibir and dissolve trusts, monopolies and combinations, whether existing in the form of corporations or otherwise"
 It requires a two-thirds vote of con- gress to submit a constitutional amendment to the state legislatures for ratification The question to so submit it was lost by vote of 154 yeas to 132 nays. Of the yeas 149 were republi- cans and only Were democrats The five were Campbell of Montana, Naphen and Taylor of Massachusetts. Scudder of New York, and Sibley of Pennsyl- vania. of the l32 nays only were re- publicans, Loud and Mccall. Richard son, Lentz, Sulzer, Ruppert Salmon and all the other professional l'Trust killers voted nay. They declined to give con gress the power to grapple with the trusts. The democrats indulged in spasms of virtue for two days, de- continue them.
 In one of MT. Bryan's recent speeches he gave the republican remedy as the final one he would adopt, in case he In other words MT. Bryan admits the value of the republican idea, but wants to try other measures first He has not said what those measures are to be.
 Some trusts operate all over rhe country; others, like the New York ice trust, operate in q single city. The re- quisite power to reach each and all and bring them within the federal law was denied by margin of 36 votes, all democratic. Denouncing is one thing. doing is another. MT. Bryan's trust de- nunciations, in view of his party's rec ord' promise no better than the proph- ecies he made four years ago; and as prophet MT. Bryan has not succeeded.
 The democrats made another bril- lSt session of congress. Representative Richardson of Tennessee, democrat, tried ito assist the sugar trust by of fering joint resolution to admit Gu ban and Porto Rioan sugar free of duty. The remission of that duty would have amounted to about $25, ,OO0, 900 Der year. The controller of the sugar trust is MT. Henry O. Havemeyer, democrat. Mr. Richardson's proposed gift to his friend MT. Havemeyer was smothered in the ways and means committee of the house. This was done by the repu,Ii- can members of the committee.
 It was also proposed by Senator Jones, democratic national chairman and MT Bryan's manager, to return the duties paid on Porto Ricln sugar and molasses, nc to the Porto Ricans. but to the persons who paid these duties. This amounted at the time to $1 ,4S7,- = S66 Had the scheme succeeded, the American Sugar Refining company and A. s. Lasalles X Co.,, part of the same concern. would have benefited by di- rect gift of $l .25O,7 This is the first instance on record where a direct gift was intended to be made to & trust. and the democratic manager Senator James K. Jones, wished to make it. This was also prevented by the repub- licans. The money was not to be re turned to the Porto Ricans, as the du- ties paid now are, but to the sugar l trust. All the facts are printed in the | Congressional Record and are a part of American history.