Courier Democrat. (Langdon, N.D.) 1891-1920, 1905-04-13
RAILROAD RATES BILL
Republican Party Responsible
For Its Failure.
RELIEF REFUSED THE PEOPLE,

Monopoly DIVINE Senators Not Like.
ly to Protect the Public From Cor
Measure Recalled,
The following from the Commoner
proves the insincerity of the Republic
an party in it's assumed role of trust
buster:
A Montgomery (Ala.) reader writes:
d you consider the Esch-Townsend
bill as a record maker for those who
voted for the measure? If the vote in
the lower house was sincere, then we
may reasonably expect Mr.. Depew to
support it in the senate. l would be
glad if you would expose some of the
inconsistency Of the vote in the lower
house."
While the Esch-Townsend bill was
not exactly what the friends Of reform
preferred, it was a move in the right
direction, and, so far as individual
members were concerned, it was a
record maker" But the failure of the
Republican senate to pass the measure
places responsibility upon the Repub-
lican party. 1t has been claimed by
many Washington correspondents and
by many men in public life that had
there been any probability that the sen
ate would pass the Esch-Townsend
bill many Of the Republican members
of the lower house whose votes We're
recorded in favor of that measure
would have found some excuse for de-
feating it.
President Roosevelt may recommend
measures designed for the public inter-
ests and one branch Of congress may
adopt those recommendations, but the
people, being interested in results, will
Judge the party by the legislation actu-
ally accomplished and the reforms ac-
tually established. The failure of the
senate to give the people relief from
railroad imposition places the RESPONSE
bility upon the Republican party, and
that party will not be relieved Of ac-
countability before the people on the
plea that some of the reforms desired
by the people were recommended by
the president and ]concurred in by one
branch Of the congress.
This is not the first time the Repub-
lican party has sought to make a rec
ord through the action of n branch of
congress under the pretense of respond
ming of the F~ifty-seventh congress,
which met in December, 1908, it was
said that the administration had deter
mined upon an antitrust campaign and
| that Mr.. Littlefeld of Maine had been
selected to lead the fight against mo-
nopoly. MI. Littleield seems tt have
been in earnest, for he prepared a bill
which Attorney General Knox and 9TH
er Republican leaders concluded was
"entirely too drastic" The bill was
amended, and among the amendments
was the provision that it should affect
only corporations hereafter organized,
leaving the existing trusts to continue
their depredations. The Littlefield bill
passed the house by unanimous vote
Feb. 6. The Democrats were not per
mitted to amend the measure. They
voted for it, not because it exactly
suited them, but because it was a step
in the right direction.
When the bill went to the senate it
was referred to a committee which
held it until the Democratic members
Of the committee, together with a mi
nority of the Republican members, re-
ported the bill over a protest of the
majority Of the Republican members
Of the committee. By the same vote
the committee added an amendment
making the bill to apply to existing
corporations as well as to future mes
But when Senator Blackburn, acting
under instructions from the Democrat
ic caucus, moved to take the bill up for
consideration in the senate only two
Republicans voted with the Democrats
to consider the measure.
In a dispatch to the Chicago Record.
Herald under date of Washington, Feb.
II, William e. Curtis said that Mr..
Littlefeld was surprised to learn that
he could not expect any encourage.
ment from Mr.. Roosevelt in the effort
to push the Littlefeld antitrust bill
through the senate
The Littlefield measure failed Of pas
sage in the senate, just as the Esch-
Townsend bill failed. In the latter
case history repeated itself.
In an address delivered before the
graduating class of the Albany Law
school June / David j. Brewer, asso-
ciate Justice of the United States SUI
preme SQUIRT, said, Senators and rep
resentatives have owed their places to
corporate influence, and that influence
has been exerted under an expectation,
if not an understanding, that as law
makers the corporate interests h be
subserved."
1t is not likely that senators who
owe their official places to corporations
will do anything to protect the people
from corporation imposition. But it is
the duty Of men who profess to serve
the people and who publicly champion
measures designed for the peoples re
lief to exert every possible effort fol
the accomplishment of practical re-
suits.
The defeat of the Littlefield antitrust