Iowa state bystander. [volume] (Des Moines, Iowa) 1894-1916, 1904-09-16

to improve and strengthen our monetary
system, and that our opponents cannot
that in popular. government such as
ours no policy Is irrevocably settled by
law unless the people keep ~ control OF
the government men who believe IN that
policy as matter of deep-rooted con-
viction. Laws can always be revoked; 1t
is the spirit and the purpose of those
responsible for their enactment and adj
which mnst be- fixed aha
monetary standard of the nation is ir-
revocably fixed so long as the party
which at the last election cast approx.
vote, refuses to put in its platform any
statement that the question is settled.
A determination to remain silent cannot
be accepted as equivalent to a recanta-
explicitly adopt the views which va 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 ne
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 II
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
The action Of the encouragement In
enforcing the antitrust and interstate
commerce laws. and the action Of the
last congress in enlarging the scope Of
the interstate commerce law, ana IN
and labor, with a bureau Of corporations.
have for the first time opened chance
for the national government to deal in
lions affecting society, whether for good
or for evil, because of the accumulation
of capital in great corporations. and be-
cause of the now relations caused there
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
any other direction-this need will be
met. 1t is now asserted "that the COM
mon law. as developed, affords com.
plete legal remedy against monopolies.
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 TINS ms
states to control trusts and monopolies;
which led to the passage Of the federal
statutes known as the Sherman anti
trust act and the interstate e. commerce
Of the powers conferred by these acts.
and by the statutes of the last congress
supplementing them, that the national
6Sse the suo esauS Is any
against trusts and monopolies should be
limited to the application of the common
law is equivalent to saying that the ma
tional government should take no action
whatever to regulate them.
Undoubtedly, the multiplication of
trusts and their increase in power has
been largely due to the failure Of off,
Gals charged with the duty of enforc-
cedure." Such structure upon the failure
of tho officials Of the national govern
ment to do their duty in this matter is
certainly not wholly undeseryed as far
dent MeKinley's is concerned; but it has
no application at all to Republican ad-
ministration. 1t is also undoubtedly true
that what Is most needed Is "ohc1als
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 IN
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, anq 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 for OPP
posing it unless misrepresented. Within
the limits defined by the national constl-
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. It has shown in effective
fashion that in endeavoring to make good
this guarantee, 1t treats all men. rich OF
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 natlor
as distinguished from the state can ac1
is narrowly cireumscribed; but within
that sphere All that coud be zone ma
Of the restriction upon the power OF &C
ton Of the national government IN sucE
matters. Being ourselves mindful @;
on the one hand to be moderate in oul
promises and on the other hand to keel
these promises in letter and in spirit
When we take up the great question OF
the tariff we are at once confronted by
the doubt as to whether our opponents l
say that protection is robbery and
promise to carry themselves accordingly
if they are given power. Yet prominent
persons nmopg them ts ASSET nd tha iey ybeS
come into power they will adopt our
policy as regards the tariff; while, oth"-5
seem anxious to prove that it is sa az
to give them partial POI, because .ne
fore they would not be able to do mis-
chief. The last is certainly q curious
plea to advance on behalf or a party
seeking to obtain control or the govern
ment
It is but ten years since the last attempt
was made. by means of lowering the
tariff, to prevent some people from pros
pering too much. The attempt was en-.
tirely successful. The tariff law ct that
that year and for some time afterwards
effectually prevented anybody from pros
pering too much. and labor from pros
pering at all: Undoubtedly 1t would De
nossible at the present time to prevent
any of the trusts from remaining pros
porous by the simple expedient Of max
ing such a sweeping change in the tar
country. The trusts would cease to pros;
per; but their smaller competitors would
be ruined, and the wage-workers would
starve, while it would not pay the farm
evils connected with the trusts can be
reached only by rational effort, step by
step, along the lines taken by congress
and the executive during the past three
From time to time schedules must un.
dollbtedly be rearranged and readjusted
to meet the shifting needs of the coun-
try: but this can with safety be done M
only by these aFe eyste 20
root and destroy that system would be
to insure the prostration of business. the
closing Of factories, the impoverishment
of the farmer the ruin Of the capital
err. Yet, if protection Is indeed robbery
and If our opponents really believe what
they say, then it Is precisely to the de-
str1ction and uprooting of the tariff. and
therefore. of our business and industry
that they are pledged. When our oppo-
nents last obtained power 1t was on q
platform declaring protective tariff
Unconstitutional" and the effort to put
this declaration into practice was one OF
the causes of the general national pros
ration lasting from 1893 to 1897. If a
protective tariff !s either ."unconstitu-
tional' or robbery then 1t is just as
unconstitutional. just as much robbery,
to revise it down. still leaving it protec-
know about this particular case and
nothing else" INQUIRED the LAWYER