The Globe-republican., 1904-09-15

or corporate, here again all we need BY
way Of answer isst0 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
we have executed them In the past " Y
( 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 bureau Of corporations
have for the first time opened q chance
for the national government to deal In
diligently and adequately with the cues.
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 directlon-this need will be
met. It Is now asserted that the COM
mon law, as developed, affords COM
plete legal remedy against monopolies"
But there Is no common law Of 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 It was this
fact, coupled with the inability Of the
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 commerce
act; and II Is only through the exercise
Of the powers conferred by these acts,
and by the statutes Of the last congress
experimenting them, that the national
government acquires any Jurisdiction
over the subject, To say that action
against trusts and monopolles 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. 2
trusts and Their increase ii power has
been largely due to the failure Of Off
cials 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
ment to do their duty In this matter Is
certainly not wholly undeserved as far
as the administration preceding Presi-
dent NcKinley's is concerned; but 1t has
no application at all to Republican ad-
mmistration. It Is also undoubtedly true
that what Is most needed Is Officials
having both the disposition and the cOur-
are 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 I'M
der the present administration,
50 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 1t, and no ground for op-
posing 1t 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
Door, 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 circumscribed; but within
that sphere all that could be done has
been done. All thinking men are aware
Of the restriction upon the power. Of ac-
tion Of the national government In such
matters. Being ourselves mindful o.
| them, we have been scrupulously careful
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
do or do not mean what they say. They
say that protection Is, robbery, and
promise to carry themselves accordingly
| il they are given power. YET prominen'
persons among them assert that tney &c
not really mean. this and that II they
come into power they will adopt oul
policy as regards the tariff; while others
seem anxious to prove that 1t Is safe
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 a party
seeking to obtain control Of the govern
ment. tiff.
a word as to the attempt to identify the
question Of tariff revision or tariff re-
ductlon with a solution Of the trust ques-
! ton. This Is always sign OF desire
| ia avoid any real effort to deal ade,
auately with the trust question. IN
speaking on this point at Minneapolis
on April A. 1903, said. ,, ,
"Ihe question of tariff revision, speak
ing broadly stands wholly. apart from
the question Of dealing with the trusts
Nh change in tariff duties can have any
substantial effect in solving the so-caled
trust problem. Certain great trusts OF
great corporations are wholly unaffected
bv the tariff. Almost all the Others that
ire ~ Of any Importance have as a matter
Of fact numbers Of smaller American
comnetitors. and of course change In
the tariff which would work injury !.
the large corporation would work no'
merely injury but destruction to lls
| smaller competitors; and equally, OF
course such change would mean dlsas,
, ter to all the ge-workers connected
/ with either the large or the. small cor
| porations. From the standpoint OF those
interested in the solution q lne lrusl
problem such a change would therefore
merely mean that the trust was relieved
Of the competition Of Its weaker Amer
Ian competitors and thrown only into
comnetition with foreign competitors;
and that the first effort to meet TINS new
comnetition would be made by cutting
dawn wages and would therefore be pri-
marjlv At the cost Of labor. In the case
of some, Of our greatest trusts such a
change might confer upon them a posi-
tive benefit. Speaking broadly, 1t is EVIL.
dent that the changes In the tariff VIII
affect the trust for veal or for woe Sim
nlv as they affect the whole country.
'Trbe tariff affects trusts only as. 1t az,
feots all other interests. 1t makes al
these interests, large or small, pront-
able and its benefits can be taken from
ne large only under penalty OF taxing
them from the small Also" =, .,,
There Is little for me to add TO THIS.
n n but len years since the last attempt
was made, BY means Of lowering the
ta T to preyent some people from pros
nerlrg too much. The attempt was en-
t pI,iNe successful. The tariff law Of that
year YEAR was among the causes which In
that year and for some tlme a sIae, 1rOa
eifectually prevented anybody from pros pros
pering too much, and labor from Z, pres.
pering at all. Undoubtedly 1t would pc e
possible at the present time 70 prevent
any Of the trusts from remaining pros
porous by the simple expedlent q max
ing such a sweeping change " the tar-
i'll as to paralyze the Industries OF inc
country. The trusts would cease to pros,
per; but their smaller competitors would