Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1904-03-26
those who we're about to fill the

those who were about to fill their
seats. 9
The republican congress was not
long inactive. The very first bill in
troduced in the senate of the fifty-frst
congress was John Sherman's anti
trust bill, Senate File No. /, 1t pass
ed both houses and received the sig
nature of Benjamin Harrison.
"The passage of this act was follow
ed by several suits for it's enforce
ment and several decisions by the SUI
preme court were secured, declaring
it constitutional and applying it to var
ious conditions. Then, on March 4,
1898, President Cleveland was again
inaugurated and in his inaugural adj
dress he refers to trusts, saying:
""These aggregations and combina-
tions frequently constitute conspira-
cies against the interests of the peo-
pie, and in all their phases they are
unnatural and opposed to our Ameri-
can sense of fairness. To the extent
that they can be reached and restrain
ed by federal, power, the general gov
eminent should relieve our citizens
from their interference and exactions.
HE suggests no modification of the
Sherman act, and recommends moth
ing in it's place. but in harmony with
the teachings of state sovereignty
statesmanship. of which he always had
been, and therefore always will be a
diligent student, he suggests that it is
very doubtful whether the federal gov
eminent has any jurisdiction in the
premises.
THAT was in his inaugural address.
He does not again refer to the subject
OF trusts in message or proclamation
until December 1896, after the election
of William Mckinley. when he can
throw the responsibility upon another.
In this,his last messagehe denounces
combinations of every description in
| language as Incorporate and inflam-
matory as was ever employed by his
| party's more recent candidate for the
presidency. He says:
Crushes independence.
"rheir tendency is to crush out in
dividual independence and to hinder
and prevent the free use of human ia
culties and the full development Of hui
man character"
! He then discouraged federal legisla-
| ton by saying:
1.-THE fact must be recognized, how
ever that all federal legislation on this
! subject may fall short of it's purpose
because of the complex character Of
our governmental system, which, while
making the federal authority supreme
| in it's sphere, has carefully limited that
| sphere by meets and bounds that cam
not be transgressed. The decision of
our highest court on this precise ques-
ton renders 1t quite doubtful whether
the evils of trusts and monopolies can
be adequately treated through federal
action unless they seek, directly and
purposely, to include in their objects
transportation or intercourse between
states or between the United States
and foreign countries"
| This, so far as the record shows, is
his last utterance, official or otherwise,
on the subject Of trusts, until he ex-
plains, In his recent interview, the rea-
son why nothing was done during
either of his administrations. While
| the platform on which he was elected
the second time promised much in the
way of antitrust legislation, nothing
| was done except to INCLUDE in the tariff
act of 1894 a provision rendering null
and void any combination, conspiracy
trust, agreement or contract, between
two or more personsTor corporations
engaged in importing, articles from any
4 foreign country into the United States
1 intended to operate in restraint OF
| trade or to increase the market price
| of any imported article or any manu-
tfacture into which imported articles
have entered" Their sole legislation
was against combinations of importers
with intent to put up the price of inn
| ported goods. In no way shape OF
/ form did they seek to prohibit a COM
bination of American manufacturers
| producers or transportation companies
1t is needless to say that no effort has
been or ever will be made to enforce
| this act for it is directed against ar
imaginary evil. Importers may repre-
sent foreign trusts, but they do not
| combine in this country to increase the
price of their imported wares. 1t was
intended to please the people and / see
no reason to presume that any existing
or contemplated trust was scared
| thereby.
Grover Explains Neglect.
And now want to refer to the Ian
guage of Mr.. Cleveland's explanation
for the sad neglect of his administra.
| ton as set forth in his authorized in
terview. He says:
1.-THE question of ethe government
4 taking legal action against the SO
called trusts was given much consider.
alton during my last administration
from 1898 to 1897. ! recall that eX.
amined closely the law and received
reports from Mr.. Olney, who was thef
attorney general. ] was most anxiou:
to have something done, but we were
blocked by decisions of the supreme
court, which at that time tied oul
hands. The decisions of the SUI
preme court, as pointed out in my mes
sage, restricted our action agains
trusts unless they were engaged in in
terstate transportation. There was {
distinct difference drawn between rail
roads and purely producing combina
tons. 1t could not be said that tn,
sugar trust or the beef trust, or tn
Standard Oil company, was directl.
engaged in interstate transportation.
1 think Mr.. Cleveland has overlooked
| the fact that Attorney General .Kno1
has at this time an injunction in full
force against seven corporations, on
copartnership, and twenty three indi
viduals engaged in the production ant
: transportation of meats and mea
lproducts restraining them, as tn
opinion shows, from requiring thei
; purchasing agents to refrain from bid
, ding against each other when maxim,
purchases; from bidding up the pric
of live stock for few days to induc
large shipments, and then ceasing t,
: bid so as to obtain live stock a