Phillipsburg herald. [volume] (Phillipsburg, Kan.) 1882-1905, 1904-09-22

tlon. Until our opponents as a party
explicitly adopt the views which we hold
and upon which we have acted and are
acting, in the matter of a sound cur
rency, the only real way to keep the
question from becoming unsettled is to
keep the Republican party in power.
AS for what our opponents say In ref
erence to capital and labor, individual
or corporate, here again all we need by
way of answer Is to point to what we
have actually done, and to say that If
continued in power we shall continue to
carry out the policy we have been pur-
suing, and to execute the laws as reso-
lutely and fearlessly in the future as
we have executed them in the past.
The action of the attorney-general In
enforcing the antitrust and interstate
commerce laws, and the action of the
last congress in charging the scope of
the interstate commerce law. and in
creating the department of commerce
and labor, with a bureau of corporations,
have for the first time opened a chance
for the national government to deal in
telligently and adequately with the ques-
lions affecting society, whether for good
or for evil, because of the accumulation
OF capital in great corporations. and be-
cause of the new relations caused there
by, The laws are now being administer
ed with entire efficiency; and as, In their
working, need is shown for amendment
or addition to them-whether better to
secure the proper publicity, or better to
guarantee the rights Of shippers, or In
any other direction-thls need Will be
met. 1t Is now asserted that the COM
mon law. as developed affords COM
plete legal remedy against monopolles."
But there Is no common law or the Unit
ed States. Its rules can be enforced
only by the state courts and officers No
federal court or officer could take any
action whatever under them. II was this
fact, coupled with the inability of the
states to control trusts and monopolies,
which led to the passage of the federal
OF a knnun the Sherman anti
trust act and the interstate commerce
act; and 1t is only through the exercise
OF the powers conferred by these acts
and by the statutes of the last congress
government acquires any jurisdiction
over the subject To say that action
against trusts and monopolies should be
limited to the. application of the common
law Is equivalent to saying that the ma
tlonal government should take no action
whatever to regulate them,
Undoubtedly, the multiplication of
trusts and their increase In power has
clals charged with the duty Of enforc-
ing the law to take the necessary pro-
cedure" Such structure upon the failure
of the officials of the national govern
certainly not wholly undeseryed as far
as the administration preceding Presi-
dent McKinley's is concerned; but 1t has
no application at all to Republican ad-
mlnistration, 1t is also undoubtedly true
that what Is most needed is Officials
having both the disposition and the cour-
age to enforce existing law" This Is
precisely the need that has been met
by the consistent and steadily continued
action of the department Of justice UNI
der the present administration.
SO far as the rights of the individual
wage worker and the individual capital
list are concerned. both as regards one
another as regards the public, and as
regards organized capital and labor, the
position of the administration has been
so clear that there Is no excuse for mis-
representing It, and no ground Tor OPP
posing 1t unless misrepresented. Within
the limits defined by the national consti-
tuition the national administration has
sought to secure to each man the full
enjoyment Of his right to live his life
and dispose Of his property and his labor
as he deems best so long as he wrongs
no one else. 1t has shown in effective
fashion that In endeavoring to make good
this guarantee, 1t treats all men; rlch or
poor, whatever their creed, their. color,
or their birthplace as standing alike be-
fore the law. Under our form Of gov
eminent the sphere in which the nation
as distinguished from the state can act
is narrowly clrcumscribed: but within
that sphere all that could be done has
been done. All thinking men are aware
of the restriction upon the power or &C
ton of the national government In such
matters. Being ourselves MINDFUL OF
them, we nave Deen SCTupulOuSly CtiIS
on the one hand to be moderate in our
promises, and on the other hand to keep
these promises in letter and In spirit.
When we take up the great question or
the tariff we are at once confronted by
the doubt as to whether our opponents
do or do not mean what they say. They
saw that protection is robbery" and
promise to carry themselves accordingly
Ii they are given power. Yet prominent
persons among them assert that they do
not really mean this and that II they
come into power they will adopt our
policy as regards the tariff; while others
seem anxious to prove that II Is sate
to give them partial power. because the
power would be only partial, and there
fore they would not be able to do mis-
chief The last Is certainly a curious
plea to advance on behalf OF party
seeking to obtain control OF the govern
At the outset It is worth while 20 say
word as to the attempt to Identity the
question of tariff revision or tarin re-
ducton with a solution of the trust ques-
ton. This Is always a sign OF desire
to avoid any real effort to deal ade-
quately with the trust question. In
speaking on this point at Minneapolis,
on April T. 1908, I said;
"The question of tariff revision, speak
ing broadly. stands wholly. apart from
the question Of dealing with the trusts.
No change In tariff duties can nave any
substantial effect In solving the so-called
great corporations are wholly UNAFFECTED
by the tariff Almost all the others that
are of any Importance have as matter
of fact numbers of smaller American
competItOrs. and OF course a change in
the tariff which would work injury to
the large corporation would work not
merely injury but destruction to ITS
smaller competitors; and equally OF
, course such n change would mean disas-
Ter 10 all the wage workers connected
with either the large or the small cor
porations From the standpoint of those
interested in the solution of the trust
problem such a change would therefore
merely mean that the trust was relieved
of the competition of its weaker Amer
connection with foreign competitors
and that the first effort to meet this new
competition would be made by cutting
down wages and would therefore be pri-
marily at the cost of labor In the case
OF some OF our greatest trusts such a
change might confer upon them posi-
tive benefit. Speaking broadly 1t Is evil
dent that the changes in the tariff will
affect the trust for veal or for woe sim
piy as they affect the whole country
The tariff affects trusts only as 1t ar
fects all other interests. 1t makes all
these interests, large or small, proht-
able: and its benefits can be taken from
the large only under penalty Oh taxing
them from the small also.
There is little for me to add to this
IL is but ten years since the last attempt
was made, by means of lowering the
tariff to prevent some people from pros
nerinR too much. The attempt was en-
tIrely successful. The tariff law OF that
wear was among the causes which In
that year and for some time atterwards
effectually prevented anybody from pros
nartno 200 much and labor from pros