The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-11-13
RRYAN AND M0NOPOLIEs.

~ nm AAAAg w nm WV - "a
Bryan we're an average politician he would.
on account OF the recent panic which he
and the President did 90 much 20 promote.
defer an exposition OF his policy till after
the annual message. but he has often played
FIRST in the long political game Of half a
dozen years he has been in with President
Roosevelt.
Ths decision by the Supreme Court hat
manufacturing. producing and selling
WhG1y within a State, whether by individ-
ualh. partnerships or corporations. are not
Interstate which can be regulated
by Congress- and that the formation Of
partnerships or corporations for business
purposes within a State and under its laws
10 not Of itself an agreement in restraint OF
trade under the Sherman law has upset
the calculations Of both in playing their
political game.
MIR. Bryan has all along made "monOpO-
lies the turning point Of his play. as II
special privileges and denial OF equality 70
-l we're given by the Government, but as we
all know there ia none such in our cOun-
try excepting under patent m copyright
avs Possibly the DingIey tariff may be
included. which is now chiefly opposed by
Mr.. Bryan mot by the Presidency as a
breeder Of monOpOlies.
h private mOnopOlies" condemned by
MIR. Bryan are made by individuals. part
nerships or corporations supervising COM
petition by concert Of action. Unification Of
interest and management. and unified tao
tics regarding prices.
Nobody defends ~monopolies. perpetui-
ties. favored classes and unequal laws. but
everybody finds constitutional difficulties
IN Congressional suppression Of them in the
several States. Mr.. Bryan attempted In
the Kansas City platform Of 1900 to meet
the situation created by the before men
toned judicial DEGREES by requiring that
each State corporation be prohibited by
Congress from doing business outside the
state OF its origin unless and until it had
complied with Congressional regulations.
That was the origin OF the naturalization
OF State corporations. either by license or
charter. elaborated 10y President Roose-
Velt's present Secretary OF the Interior in
his report OF December, 1900. as Commits
siOner OF Corporations. In his Province
town speech the President declared finally
Tor q national charter before a State cOrpo-
ration could do an interstate business. He
adopted last summer Mr. Bryan's suGges-
ton made in 1900.
The evolution OF corporations and per-
petuities out OF partnerships and limited
partnerships is the disturbing problem.
They could by the States be abolished alto
gether, or their capital could be limited. or
each State could exclude those Of any other
State. But nobody is prepared for either
plan unless willing 10 abandon competition
by our country in foreign markets.
There are visible three different theories Of
solving the vexing problem, represented re-
spectively by Roosevelt. Bryan and Hughes.
The first two are soon to explain theirs.
What their theories have been we all know.
Governor Hughes seems to stand with the
President for regulation OF corporations
and not for State ownership. but unlike the
President he seems to think that Federal
laws should only supplement and aid State
laws, not supersede them.
II will be recalled that in the interval
between the making Of a State platform
by the New York Democracy early in 1904,
which commanded Chief Justice Parker to
the next Democratic national convention,
and the meeting Of that convention at st.
Louis on July g. 1904. Mr.. Bryan hired a hall
in Chicago at his expense. al he said.
and furiously denounced on April %. 1904,
the New York platform and the candidacy
OF Chief Justice Parker. Therein he con-
demned the New York Democracy because.
~upholding the Supreme Court doctrine. they
denied by implication the constitutional
power OF Congress 20 prevent and destroy
a private monopoly carrying on business
wholly in New York IL the State preferred
Co maintain the existence OF such a mon
opoly.
In that speech Mr.. Bryan also condemned
Mr.. Justice Brewer Of the Supreme. Court
because he minated in the Northern SeCu-
rites case hat the Sherman antitrust law
could be applied only to an unreasonable
restraint Of trade. President Roosevelt
seems h concur with Justice Brewer. but
would have the Interstate Commerce Com
mission pass on the rcasonableness. which
is either a Legislative or a judicial question.
but not an executive question.
1t must be that the New York Democ-
racy will eagerly read Mr.. Bryan's pres
ent opinions of that speech and Of his
declaration. made some ten weeks before
Chief Justice Parker's nomination at sc.
Louis. that he is not a ft man 70 be nom
mated either by the Democratic party or
by any other party hat stands for honesty
and fair dealing in politics.
Conservative men in every State will also
wish 20 know whether Mr.. Bryan now up
holds his definition Of a monopoly made
in Madison Square Garden on August 30,
1909. and that it must be subjected to the
pains and penalties Of h Sherman anti
trust law.
Conservative voters will likewise wish to
be told by himself whether ne now thinks
that il the m~onopolistic tendency of such
a corporation cannot be destroyed the
ownership OF the corporation. it's franchise
and business. together with the manage
ment thereof. must be confiscated and taken
over by the nation or the State.
New YORK. November II. PoLTrIos.
Praise for BOstOn's Greatest Author.