New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-06-02

DEMOCRATS AID TRUSTS
THEY KILL PROPOSED CON.
.STITT7TONAL AMENDMENT.
REPUBLICANS UNABLE TO MUSTER THE
NECESSARY TwO-THIRDS VOTE
IN THE HOUSE.
fBY TELEGRAPH To THE rRIBuxE.I


trusts to-day by defeating the joint resolution
amend the Constitution of the United States
so as TO cIothe Congress with power dissolve
corporations. associations and partnerships or
ganized and Co.. .ucted with view to prevent
free competition. control production and TX
prices. The stood 154 TO 49, giving ma
jority of %. The affirmative vote SO short
of the requisite two-thirds.
Despite the brave show OF Indignation and
independence made by number OF Demo-
Gratis in the caucus on Tuesday night and re-
peated since in various places Of eonvivial re-
sort only five of them mustered enough cour-
age to go on record in favor of the resolution
And neither Suzer. the brave and heroic; Rup-
pert. the dashing and reckless in courage:
Salmon nor Lentz who knows no fear-except
when forced to face the music-was among
them. The five We're Messrs. Campbell. OF
Montana: Naphen and Thayer of Massa-
chusetts: Scudder. of New-York. and Sibley. of
Pennsylvania. The trail of the Ice Trust was
over all the Tammany braves from the Borough
of Manhattan. and of all the other Demo-Pops
and Pops from other districts and States Mr.
Newlands. the Nevada silver member, voted
with the Republicans.
Two Republicans-Messrs. Loud and Mccall
voted with the Democrats. The latter seems 10
have become so accustomed to follow Mr. Rich
ardson. the Democratic leader. that he cannot
but spoke against the joint resolution
Mr. Richardson ana his Demo-Pop followers
demonstrated their partisan consistency in a
marked degree. For two days they had been
indulging in and enjoying one of their spasms
of indignation and denunciation on account OF
trusts and monopolies." and railing against the
'octupus" and then they recorded their votes
against proposition to give Congress power to
deal with the same. 1t truly an Instructive
and refreshing occasion. and the exhibition was
we'll worth the cost of admission
The debate which preceded the vote was an
exceedingly lively one, especially on the part OF
the Democrats. to whose sore places heartless
Republicans gleefully applied hot and strong
brine at frequent intervals. Absurdity and ap-
positeness were happily blended in one of the
questions asked OF the Democrats. which was:
Whether the Dingley tariff was the mother OF
the Tammany Ice Trust?' The question still
remains unanswered.
Mr.. De Armond of Missouri. closed the debate
in opposition to the BILL and Mr.. Littefeld OF
Maine in favor of it, Both Of them are mem
bers of the Judiciary Committee The latter's
speech was a valuable contribution TO the dis
cussion despite the fact that it was marked by
allusions and references TO the Democratic party
which made It unsuitable for circulation as a
Democratic campaign document.
THE DEBATE IN DETAIL
Mr.. Grosvenor devoted few minutes explain
ing that the failure of the Ohio Republicans to
nominate Attorney-General MOnnett did not indi-
cate that they opposed TO the prosecution Of
trusts
Mr. Lentz of Ohio. said it was exceedingly pleas
ant for him 10 hear Mr. Grosvenor apologize for
the treatment of Attorney-General Monnett by the
Republican party of Ohio. You know he said.
that Mr. Monnetr was a candidate for Governor
as the champion OF the people against trusts. yet
not a single Republican delegate dared raise his
voice in his favor He got but twenty-eight votes
You have a reputation a mathematician Here
Is a problem for you: If Mr. Monnett for fighting
one trust got only twenty-eisht votes. how many
votes would he have received il he had fought all
the trusts Elect William Jennings Bryan Demo
cratic appause), and he will place at the head OF
the Department OF Justice attorney general not
from the trust ridden State of New-Jersey. who
will keep the trusts busy they Will not have
time 70 pursue their rapacious vocations- Demo-
cratic applauseD
GENERAL GROSvENOR REPLIES TO LENTz-
When Mr. Grosvenor replied from the in
front of the Speakers rostrum members gathered
about him deep. His Republican friends gave
him round after round of applause II the Demo-
Gratis elected their President Mr.. Lentz pre-
dicted and proceeded TO destroy the trusts, he
said that destruction must take place under Re-
publican law placed the statute books against
Democratic opposition. Later. touching an in
cident in the political history OF Ohio he referred
TO the way the Democrats had driven out Re-
publican official. Democrats in another State
had hustled Republican Governor"
But they didn't murder him. cried Mr. Rhea, OF
Kentucky.
Neither did they put up 600 punish
body who not guilty!' retorted Mr. Grosvenor.
AS he proceeded Mr. Grosvenor and Mr. Lentz ex-
changed personalities again and again Mr. Gros-
concluded with the statement that the IA
vorite Democratic weapon used for fighting trusts
was the vocabulary. He characterized Mr. Lentz's
remarks as "slush'
Mr. Pearce OF Tennessee. read a signed interview
with General Grosveror. printed some time ago.
declaring that constitutional amendment was
unnecessary to deal with trusts
MR. DE ARMOND CHARGES BAD FAITH
Mr. De Armond OF Missouri. closed the debate
for his side with a speech an hour and a half In
length. He said the proposition before the House
might be viewed from two points-the trust Gues-
don and the coming Presidential election. In his
opinion. the Republicans were thinking not OF de-
stroying the trusts. out of the coming election
When Congress assembled the Republican leaders
rushed through. under whip and spur. the financial
law. which they really intended should go on the
statute books Now at the end OF the session they
proposed a trust remedy not the evil OF
trusts. but to tide them over the campaign. He
found difficulty in defining his position he said
He opposed 10 the hollow mockery OF going
through the motions of cendng il 10 the Senate
TO be buried there The people would not be de-
ceived The trust evi! them was not a fare.
comedy. IL was serious. all important problem
TO be solved and no more political trickery would
be satisfactory 10 them The proposed amend
ment he said. bore on its face irrefutable evidence
that II was not intended TO be placed in the Con-
stituton 10 control trusts but be placed in the
campaign 10 delude voters. Democratic applause1
'Can there, he said. be anything in the propO-
sition that, because You label this antitrust We
shall not look beyond the label? You have labelled
many things other than what they are There IA
nor