The Virginia enterprise. [volume] (Virginia, St. Louis County, Minn.) 1893-19??, 1900-07-27
grand progress and grand history tho


Democratic party calls imperialism
1.-THE Revolutionary war, the Civil war,
and the Spanish war ere the three great
epochs in our history. The first gave e
birth to- the republic, the second estab-
hshed its vitality, and the third extended
It's blessings to distant chimes and distant ;
peoples. The Revolutionary war had it's
George washington, the Civil war is
Lincoln, and the Spanish war it's Me-
klnley. The task Of our president has
been Herculean, but he has acquitted him
sell OF the same as 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
it's foremost citizen. There were men
that were blind and could lot 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 combina tons.
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,
nonopolies and unlawful combinations.
The first of these is the so-called inter-
state commerce law of 1887-passed by a
Democratic house and 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, or 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 a Republican
congress. AS interpreted by the supreme
court of the United States, through
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 interpreted
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 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, 1856 U. S. Ours is dual govern
ment-state and federal-and the federal
government is one of limited powers, pre-
scribed in the Constitution The chief
legislative power for controlling and reg
! ulatlng trusts rests with the several
states. And there is only one of two ways
| pen 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 to 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
! err power and authority in the premises.
| This last plan was attempted by the Re-
| publicans in the house of representatives
| in the last congress. A bill for a 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
| body, because nearly the entire Demo-
cratic vote was solidly against 1t. On this
occasion their old-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, bill
to enlarge improve and strengthen the
remedial features of the Sherman law. It
came to the senate too late to be acted
upon at that session, but 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-
lative
Record of the Two Parties.
"The Republicans passed the Sherman
law, passed a bill through the house to
strengthen 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 1884, embracing the antitrust
provision as to importers and imports,
and opposed en- masse the passage of the
4 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 a showing, and that, whatever
may be their attitude on trusts in gen.
eral, there is one trust they have a W arm
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