Bisbee daily review., 1905-05-19

Bryan denounced monopoly in all forms and indorsed Roosevelt's efforts to secure railroad rate legislation.
 Mir. Bryan's theme was Thomas Jefferson" whom he quoted on the subject of acquiring territory by con quest now favored by an influential portion of our countrymen," as saying. If there be one principle more deeply rooted than another in the mind of ey- cry American it Is that we should have nothing to do with conquest" also that conquest is pot in our principles: it is inconsistent with our government" i Continuing. Mir. Bryan said:
 "On the subject of taxation he ever insisted upon it's limitation to the ac- tual needs of government and upon It's equitable distribution. He Is on rec ord in favor of the arbitration of dis. putes between nations. and no one who is familiar with his writings can doubt that he would favor arbitration today of disputes between labor and capital. | and his views upon tie eucroachments | of tue judiciary and the value of trial by jury make it certain that he would. | if living. oppose what we know as gov ernmeut by injunction.
 No one can imagine Jefferson as toleratinS the impudent claim of the railroad magnates that they have q right to determine arbitrarily and without appeal the rate to be charged for the transportation of passengers or freight. What an opportunity the present contest would give him for the arraignment of human greed and for the defense of human rights, That Jetferson's utterances support Iegisla- ton necessary for the complete regula- ton and control of transportation lines is certain, and he expressly declared against national incorporation, thing now desired by the great corporations.
 While I have been quick to indorse the presidents effort to secure railroad rate regulation, believe that regula- ton will ultimately lead to public own ership, and in order to avoid the dan ger of eentralization 1 would prefer to see the trunk lines only owned by the federal government and the local lines owned by the several states.
 'On the subject of private monopoly Jefferson has spoken with no uncertain sound. So detestable to him was the thought of monopoly that it was with reluctance that he consented to q patent, for, while he recognized the justice of allowing a temporary monopoly Of the product as a reward for invention, he so feared the evil effects of the estab- lishment of the principle that he insist ed upon the strictest limitations. Ills fears have been justified, and we are beginning to understand the dangers that he so clearly foresaw.
 "In the city of Chicago has been won the most notable victory achieved thus far In the United States for the cause of municipal ownership.
 Gan any one be so ignorant of the aims. arguments and principles of Jef- ferson as to quote him in support of a corporation which monopolizes the highways of this great city? Can any one believe that he would subordinate his objections to monopoly in order to defend the right of few monopolists to reap an enormous profit from the use of streets made valuable not by the capitalists, but by the people of Chi cago: if Jefferson was ioath 10 fn- dorse q patent which gave man limited monopoly of a thing which he actually invented would he be likely to favor the giving of a permanent mo nopoly to men who invent nothing ex- cept new methods of evading taxation or of corrupting councils?
 "Nothing is more consistent with the support of Jeffersonian principles than the ownership and operation by the public of every industry which is in it's nature a monopoly. Where compe- tition Is impossible the benefits of mo- nopoly must accrue to the whole peo- pie, not to few.
 "In the matter of water plants the cities have made great progress, but a small percentage of the water plants being now owned by private corpora tions. The taking over Of the lighting l plants has not gone so far, but the | movement is now well under way, But few of the cities have undertaken to es- l tablish telephone exchanges, but this is a necessary step, and unless it is taken Y soon we shall have the same struggle that We have gone through in regard to water planfs and lighting plants.
 "The third Jehersonian doctrine that Is now being mislnterpreted and mis- applied is his argument against long time debts. He took the position that the earth belonged in succession to each generation and that a preceding gen eration had no right to mortgage the earth beyond its occupancy of 1t. If his doctrine had been adopted it would be much easier to deal with the prob lems of today, but it is manifestly un- fair to permit railroads and municipal corporations to mortgage the public for generations and then to quote Jeffer- son against the issue of bonds when a city attempts to rid itself of private monopoly.
 Tt is better for a city to issue bonds at low rate of interest and for actual Improvements than for city to permit