The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-11-15
Nov. is. 1904
H,OPLE FAVOR THE
u TRUSTS?

&c nhond Times-Dispatch, after
khe campaign just closed, es-
Mr. Bryan's attitude and dec!a-
10 the trusts and the pledges
democratic speakers that the
kwould be curbed by a democratic
n~fsfration, announces it's conclu-
~egarding the astounding results
itHe election to be that the people
lot want vigorous measures taken
Inst the big money corporations and
cozhbines.
We cannot see how this follows under
sexIsting circumstances There might
be some reason in the argument had
the republicans in their platform de-
clared in favor of trusts and had their
!, speakers during the campaign come to
their defense and taken issue with the
democrats On this point. They did Moth
ing of the sort. though. Their claim
was that the republican party had done
more than the democratic in the way of
legislation for protection of the people
against unjust treatment at he hands
of these combinations and that only
during a republican administration had
these laws been enforced by the courts.
The Times-Dispatch calls attention to
the fact that Mr.. Bryan in his cam
paign speeches urged the people thai
the way to curb the rusts was to eject
Judge Parker. He charged that trusts
We're the special pets of the republican
party. Yet says that paper, 1.-The
people defeated Judge Parker and elect
ed Mr.. Roosevelt by an overwhelming
majority" From this it argues that
the people are on the side of the trusts
in an attack upon their existence or an
attempt to force them into legal bounds.
1t is more likely that the people did
not put any faith in Mr.. Bryan n the
other democratic speakers as to what
their party would do were it entrusted
with the conduct of the government, or
they did not consider the trust issue
of sufficient Importance to outweigh Mr..
Roosevelt's personality. There is no
doubt about it that the presidents pop
ularity secured for him thousands of
votes that any other man running on
the same platform and declaration of
political principles would not have re-
ceived. The endorsement of Mr.. Roose-
welt by the people who ave him his
two million majority was not in any
way an expression of approval of what
the democrats declared to be the atti-
tude of himself and his party toward
the trusts.
The Times-Dispatch's conclusions
are:
The fact is, and this election shows
it, that the people at large are not so
much opposed to the trusts as the anti
trust speakers would make it appear
Thousands and thousands of peronS
own stock in them, thousands and tens
of thousands of persons are employed
by them. n comparatively few feel
that they are personally oppressed or
disadvantaged by them. his will be re-
garded by some as reasonable, but We
point them to the election returns. If
the masses are so much opposed to The
trusts, why did they not rise up and
smite them in the late election? Why
did they return to power by an over
whelming majority. the republican par
ty, which is the recognized friend of
trusts? Trusts or no trusts, the coun-
try is prospectus and the votes were
unwilling at this time to go into trust
smashing or tariff tinkering, OF any
thing else that might tend to "unsettle
business" They were satisfied and they
prouosed to stand pat and let we'll
enough alone. That is a ~cold-bloo1ed
view, but it is h fact. Let us add.
however, that it does not make tariff
bounties right and it does not mean
that the people are in favor of a system
which enriches the trusts at the ex-
pense of the consumer and by and by
they are going to smash the system to
pieces, no matter what the effect on
the business interests.
& %