Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1903-02-19
20

this Republican congress admit its made
Quacy and propose at this late day to sup
plement the provisions Of the Sherman
law.
take it the Republican party is pro-
ceeding upon the idea "better late than
never" This construction of Republican
action is more lenient than the conclusion
that the Republican party has been forced
to abandon its inaction by the fear of de-
feat and the rising storm of popular in
dignation at its policy of favoritism to-
ward and liberation of the combinations
of capital which oppress the masses de-
stroy competition and endanger the free
institutions of the greatest republic in all
history.
Whatever may be the motive for franz
ing and presenting this legislation to this
congress it is true either. first, that the
Sherman act of July g. $780, and the sub
sequent amendments thereto in the Will
son tariff act of Aug. 2S, 1894, expressly
preserved in the Dingley act of 1897, have
not been enforced by the Republican adj
miniStrationS since their enactment or,
second, that they are Ineffective, in whole
or in part, to curb and restrain monopoly.
Additional legislation is necessary and is
demanded by the people of the country.
] shall not attempt in this debate to dis
cuss the economic questions involved in
the formation and growth of trusts or the
legal aspects of the Sherman law and
pending measure of the committee.
I am sure these matters have had the
full and careful consideration of the ju-
dietary committee, and the whole subject
as adjudicated in the courts and from the
standpoint of political economy presents
vast field of thought, study and investi-
cation. The national and state antitrust
laws, the decisions of the United States
supreme court and the recommendations
of the president doubtless have received
the consideration of the committee.
The interstate and foreign commerce
clause of the constitution of the United
States (article l, section s. clause -,
and the decisions of the United States su-
preme court, enumerated in the reply of
the attorney general, dated Jan. 3, 1903, to
the communication of Senator Hoar,
chairman of the senate judiciary commit
tee from the Knapp case down to and in
Guiding the Addystone Pipe and Steel COM
pany case, show that the power of con-
gress to legislate upon the question is
ample so far as interstate commerce is
concerned. Invoking this power at the
last session of this congress, Democrats
introduced many bills, among others bills
providing for
First-Publicity.
Second.-Placing trust made goods on
the tariff free list.
Third.-Making trust made goods liable
to state antitrust laws when they enter
Fourth.-Placing upon the free list trust
home. at a less price to the foreigner
than to the American citizen.
None of these measures was adopted
by the Republican majority, but all were
buried in the committee. One Republican,
the distinguished and able gentleman
from Maine IMr. Littlefeldl, introduced
one bill to amend and strengthen in q
very mild form the Sherman law.
But since the election and since the Re-
publican party has had some greater man
Hesitation of the popular opposition to
trusts and the feeling of the people upon
this great question at this late day and
| hour they now propose this measure of
slight relief to the people, which Will
| doubtless meet the usual fate of all Re-
publican antitrust bills originating in this
house-namely, a lingering death upon
the senate calendar.
| But, Mr. Chairman, does this legislation
| yet go far enough? Does 1t strike at the
root of the evil? Does it eradicate and
cure the trust cancer upon the body
polite? VIII it do more, if t-does that,
than to alleviate temporarily the evil and
restrain the cancerous growth while mo-
nopoly still exists? The real danger to
the country lies in the formation and the
overcapitalization of the 2S7 corporate
trusts of the country, 200 of which are
| benefited by and owe their formation to
| the tarlff laws or the Republican party.
Henry o. Havemeyer, president of the
| sugar trust said on June IA, 1899:
1.-The mother of all trusts is the customs
| tariff bill. 1t is the government through
| its tariff laws which plumbers the people,
| and the trusts are merely the machinery
| for doing it,
The national Democratic platform of
| 1900 declared:
1--WE condemn the Dingley tariff law as
! trust breeding measure skillfully devised
| to give the few favors which they do not
deserve and to place upon the many bur-
| dens which they should not bear"
| Mr.. Babcock. chairman of the national
| Republican congressional executive COM
mittee, in 1901 said
| by the aid of the tariff manufacturers
can fix exorbitant prices in the domestic
market
| And. as has been tersely said, ''the
| Dingley law ties the hands of the Ameri-
can consumer while the trusts pick his
| Dockets"