The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-05-30
REvERIDGE VS.. bryan.

BEN EISlDGE vs.. BRYAN.
A warm debate on the trust ques-
ton between Mr.. Bryan and Senator
Beveridge is in progress in The Read
! err Magazine, and it is of interest to
note their attacks upon each others
arguments.
Mr.. Bryan advocates the dissolu-
ton of the trusts; Senator Beveridge
their regulation. In reply to Mr..
Bryan's dissolution idea, the Indiana
senator asks:
would Mr.. Bryan dissolve the
United States Steel corporation? If so,
how?
eff he would dissolve it and can
tell how to dissolve it. how far would
he carry the dissolution? For ex-
ample, would he restore the various
plants to the corporations which
owned them before the steel corpora
ton was formed? If so. how, since
some, if not all, of those companies
are now extinct and many of their
stockholders are dead?
And, having dissolved the steel
corporation, what would become of its
present shareholders. of whom there
are hundreds of thousands? If he
would make them stockholders in the
smaller corporations resulting from
his dissolution of the steel company,
how much stock would he give to
each. and in which of the smaller
companies would he place them And
would he consult the present stock
holders as to which of the smaller
companies he would assign them?
IF Mr.. Bryan would dissolve these
great industrial organizations of cap
ital would he also Dissolve the equally
great organizations of labor? And if
competition is good thing in itself
why is not labor competition as good
as capital competition? If capital
should not combine. why should la
Dor combine? I am for honest and
orderly organization OF both labor and
capital-why does Mr.. Bryan dis
criminate?"
In the same issue of the magazine
the June number-Mr Bryan re-
plies to some former statements of
Senator Beveridge. 'It is probably
true" he says, that the trust may, in
the long run. break down of it's own
weight, but there is little consolation
in this fact to the short-winded man
who can not stand a long run. 1t is
criminal folly to postpone effective
legislation in the hope that the trust
will at last find that it is unwise to
charge more than a fair profit.
Senator Beveridge enumerates sew
eral evils of the trusts. First, rebates,
which he says we have ended Let
us hope that these have been ended,
although the tenderness with which
the public deals with the Standard
Oil company. after it has been con-
victed of violating the law in twelve
hundred different cases, is not en-
couraging. Many of our college presi-
dents are still anxious to secure from
Mr.. Rockefeller a part of the money
that he has made in violating the law
Would they be as willing to solicit
from the professional safe-breaker or
from the ordinary highwayman Why
should grand larceny be regarded as a
less heinous crime than petty larceny?
Another evil is contributions and
| Senator Beverage assures US that we
have ended them Not yet. 1t is not
sufficient to prevent contributions
from corporations. for where there is
a great temptation to aid in cam
paigns, the officers will find ways of
contributing that will not bring the
corporation within the letter of the
| law. Opa of the Washington corre-
' sponSents has reported the president