The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1906-11-01
A BIT OF TRUST HISTORY.

The record of the two great political
parties during the past twenty years
has been very consistent upon the trust
question. The record of the Republican
party shows that it has consistently and
persistently battled against the trusts,
not only in legislation. The record OF
the Democratic party during the same
period shows that it has been a consis-
tent and persistent opponent of all trust
legislation, and that it has constantly
thwarted the efforts Of the Republican
party to control the so-called trusts
throughout the country. The attitude
of the two parties may be summed up
in the two words performance and
promise. 1t will be admitted that the
/ Democratic party has made great pre-
/ tention as to what it would do to curb
the trusts, and yet when the party has
been in power, and an opportunity has
presented itself for them TO carry out
their promises, they have failed to full
fill their pledges.
As far back as the Fiftieth Congress
the Democrats began their agitation for
effect by the passage Of resolution
authorizing the House Committee on
Manufactures to enter upon an investi-
cation of the Trusts of the United
States. Such distinguished Democratic
leaders as Representative Wilson Of
West Virginia, Representative Breckin-
ridge Of Arkansas, Representative
| Bynum of Indiana, and Representative
Bacon, of New York, were members of
the Committee, and they were given
power to administer oaths, examine
witnesses, compel the attendance of
persons and the production of papers.
and make their investigation thor
ough one. More than 100 witnesses, in
GLIDING H. A. Havemeyer and Claus
Spreckels Of sugar fame, Mr.. Rockefel-
Ter, Mr.. Flagler and others of the
Standard Oil Company, and representa-
tives of the cotton bagging trust and
whiskey trust were examined. A thou
sand pages of testimony We're taken and
the Committee delayed report until one
day before the expiration of the Con-
gress, when it presented its testimony,
but made no recommendation as to leg
islation, owing to the present differ
ence of opinion between members of the
Committee In the Fifty-second Con
gress the House Judiciary Committee
made another investigation and after
an examination of many witnesses, sub
mitted a report in which it declared
that none of the methods employed by
the trust in controlling the production
or disposition of their products are in
violation of the United States laws,
and that cit is clearly settled that the
production or manufacture of that which
may become a subject of interstate
commerce and ultimately pass into pro-
tected trade is not commerce is nor can
manufacturers of any sort be instru-
ments of commerce within the mean
lilS VI IIlS CONSTITUTION. In 1894 thew
again grappled with the Trust problem,
adding to the Wilson-Gorman tariff law
series of provisions purporting to
authorize the regulation of Trusts but
whichneither the Democratic President
nor the Democratic officials who were
in power when the Act came into exist
ence made, so far as is known, any at
tempt to put it into operation.
The difference between Democratic
promises and Republican performances
is strikingly Illustrated by the enact
ment of the measure known as the
Sherman Antitrust Law, which was
enacted in 1890 by Republican Con-
gress and signed by Republican Pres
ldent-Benjamin Harrison. Although
the Democrats sneered at the bill which
they contended was simply a piece of
buncombe and would be only dead