The Washington herald., 1907-02-25

William Jennings Bryan is not one OF
those who believe that there must be
some amendment Of the Constitution Of
the United states To enable Congress 90
deal with the trust evil. While at one
time Mr.. Bryan believed a constitutional
amendment necessary, he now holds that
it is within the powers Of Congress to
destroy monopolies by Withdrawing from
them the use Of the mails and Of inter
state railroads and telegraphs.
Mr. Bryan advances this as bis anti
trust remedy in a notable article con-
tributed. as the first instaIlment Of his
debate with Senator Beveridge. in the
current issue Of The Reader magazine.
Because Of the prominence OF the de-
baters, each representing his own party.
and because Of the part the discussion
may play in the shaping Of the issues for
the coming Presidential campaign, this
magazine debate promises to attract
much attention in political circles.
''The Nation VS.. State Rights" is the
general theme OF this first instaIIrnent,
Air. Bryan writing upon our Dual Gov
ernment" and Senator Beveridge upon
''Thc Nation" Mr. Bryan's argument
is for the strict preservation 81 the
rights Of the States in ali legislation
Senator Bevcridge contends for Federal
legislation 10 cover all those problems
OF national interest in dealing with which
the States have proved themselves lax.
Antitrust Remedies.
Mr. Bryan saws: There IS a real evil
to be corrected. and real public sent.-
ment 20 be satisfied. A constitutional
amendment Was proposed few years
ago, specifically authorizing Congress to
deal with the subject. It was opposed By
Democrats on the ground that Il did not
protect the rights of the States. While
such an amendment, properly drawn. con
I ferriHg pIenary powers upon Congress.
/ but reserving 10 the States the powers
which they now have, would be Unobjec-
/ tionabIe. il has not yet been shown To
I be necessary Congress has power to
control interstate commerce. and the de-
csion of the Supreme Court in the lottery
case leaves little doubt that that power
/ can be so exercised as % withdraw the
( interstate railroads and telegraph lines
and the mails from corporations which
/ control enough Of the product of any ar
/ ticle 70 give them a monopoly. No as
sault upon the authority or contraction
of the sphere OF the State can be justi-
/ fed on the ground that il is necessary
/ for the overthrow of mOnopolies. Fed
/ eraI remedies should supplement State
/ remedies. they should not be substituted
/ for Stale remedies
/ Speaking generally OF the growing de-
mand in some quarters for the enlarge
meat of Federal powers, Mr.. Bryan traces
this demand 10 TWO sources. Those who
believe with Hamilton in the theory of
/ GENERALIZATION. and those who want legis-
lation which the State rights doctrine
obstructs -Of these two classes. be
SAYS, the last is the most influential. be
cause the members of this class impact
/ 70 their method the strength supplied by
/ the object aimed at. An abstract theory
seldom provobes discussion. but wars
I have been fought over theory embodied
( in & concrete issue
! As To National Incorporation.
( In reference 10 the agitation in favor
+ Of national Incorporation of railway and
industrial enterprises. MI. Bryan does not
think it likely that such an amendment
will ever be adopted, for the reason THAI
{ it is very unlikely, as ne sees it. that
majority of Congress can ever he brought
Ito favor any enlargement Of the power
( OF commercial corporations lie thinks.
however. that two constitutional amcnI-
mcnts have been shown to DC ueccss1rE.
one relating to the method of eis-tUE
! United States Senator's and tnc other o.
/ the income tax. The first Of these" he
( says, "is required TO make the Senator
the servant of the people whom M rep
I rescnts; the second is necessary TO PEE
mltfan equitable distribution Of the bur
dena OF the Federal government, bat
neither Of these amendments you'd dis-
/ turb In the least the balance between
/ the general and the State governments
7 Air. Bryan stands squaroly with tn
people of San Francisco on the ScEOu.
question. OF this phase OF current dis
cussion he says;
An argument has recently been made
/ in favor of extending the sphere OF the
( general government, viz, that it is ncee>-
saTy u do so TO protect the treaty rigu.s
Of foreigners. Some have gone so far as
/ to assume that Congress has power Go
carry out the terms of q treaty without
regard TO constitutional provisions Z ms
( is a very palpable error. for the President
and Senators who join I'm the making Of
a treaty are bound by oath To support the
Constitution. and they can make ns
/ binding treaty which violates the COnsti-
tuition. a Constitution which can 0rly
be amended by the concurrence of the
people of three-fourths of the States can
not be suspended by the mere concurrence
of the President and the Senate.
Exclusion of japanese Responsible.
THE exclusion Of japanese students
from certain Of the schools of san Fran
cisco aroused the discussion In regard -
the treaty rights of the members of that
race living in San Francisco. Upon NO
subject viii the people of State insist
more strenuously in controlling ,hcir own
/ affairs than I'm matters OF education. Tho
school-room is in close and constant con
/ tact with the home. and the parents.
having a vital interest in the instruction
OF their children and an intimate ac-
quaintance with local conditions. would
not and should not consent to national
control or supervision. No construction
of the Constitution could bring State
/ schools within the scope Of Federal lesis-
lation. and no amendment contemplating
such a change would commend itseis 10
any section of the country"
/ While he specifically excepts earnest
! and honest advocates Of the State rights