The sun., 1908-10-13
BRYAN ATTACKS COY. HUGHES
HINTS THAT HE LEANS TOWARD
TRUSTS AND MONOPOLIES.
Resents the Governors Ridicule OF the
Democratic Platforms Plan for 80
Per Cent. gulation-Denounces
Rooseyelt's Selection OF Taft.

Democratic Platforms Plan for 80
Per Cent. observation-disclosures
Rooseyelts Selection OF Taft.
LINCOLN, Oct. 12.-Before an audience
of 1, 500 students at the State University
this evening, Mr.. Bryan launched his
javelin at Gov. Hughes and by innuendo
charged that the Governor was influenced
in his veto Of the two cent fare bill by his
bias in favor Of the men who had con-
tributed large part of his campaign fund.
Mr.. Bryan also denounced the Governor
for laughing at and ridiculing the Demo-
cratic platforms remedy for trusts with
out Offering anything in its place. Mr..
Bryan said in part:
Gov. Hughes OF New York has been
ut forward as the champion OF the Re-
publican party to attack the Democratic
remedy for the trusts, and the President
seems to prefer the argument advanced
by Mr.. Hughes to the argument advanced
by Mr.. Taft l can fairly assume. there
fore, that the argument presented by Gov.
Hughes is not only the strongest argu-
ment that has been presented but the
strongest argument that can be presented.
because Mr. Roosevelt would not pit him
against our platform il he were not the
strongest opponent.
He has been sent through the West
to strengthen the Republican lines. l
desire to remind you in the first place
that Mr.. Hughes repres ents the Eastern
Republicans. not the Western Republi-
cans. He was one Of the candidates
a gainst Mr.. Taft when Mr.. Taft was being
urged as the representative OF the
Administration. Mr. Hughes's friends
joined with the friends Of Mr.. Cannon,
Mr.. Knox and Mr.. Fairbanks in the effort
to prevent the nomination Of Mr.. Taft.
Il is only fair to assume. therefore, that
Mr.. Hughes ia not n reformer in the sense
in which the term is used by the Reupb-
licans OF the West
Il am glad they fired their big gun
first. When that is silenced we need not
bother about the smaller ones.
AS an evidence that MIR. Hughes is
not in sympathy with Western reforms
you will recall that he vetoed two cent
passenger rate bill and he did this in spite
Of the fact that Republican Legislature
Of New York passed the bill. The Gov
ernor in the Western States signed this
bill and we're now enjoying the benefits
Of the two cent fare.
New York is more thickly settled than
the Western States. and yet he gave the
benefit of the doubt to the railroads in
their contest with the patrons. will
not saw that he did this because OF the
contributions made to his campaign fund
by MIR. Morgan. Senator Depew. the
Vapderbilts and one Of the Goulds. There
is only one other explanation. that his
of corporations that II was not necessary
TO contribute to his campaign to secure
his support
exempler Of reform j want the people
here to know his record as reformer. IL
is not strange that he should oppose the
remedy on the trust question.
for he has never shown any interest in
the corrections of evils that the trusts
have brought upon the country.
Il will not say that his partiality for
the trusts is due to the contributions made
to his campaign fund by Carnegie, Schwab
Gates, Havemeyer. Duke and others.
1t is not necessary to assume that these
influenced him at all. 1t
NAV be his natural disposition to take
the side OF the trust as against the people.
II ia speech presents all the evidence neoes-
sary to convict him Of lack OF sympathy
with the general public.
Does he manifest any concern about the
wrong, done to the people by the trusts5
None whatever With him it Is a subject
of amusement; it is really too funny for
to think that anybody should
try TO do anything. IL you will read his
speech on this subject you will agree with
me when liken the situation TO the case
of a sick man who is about to try remedy
comes in and says: What? Are you going
TO take that remedy? Why, that Is ridicu-
ious; that is absurd. and then retires
from the room laughing and leaving the
patient without a remedy and without
Now. il the patient is not
really sick that might be excusable. but
Fhat do you think ABOUT it? Is the
doing no harm, then. Of course, no remedy
is needed; II the trusts are doing harm,
then why does not DR.. Hughes propose
something?
sHe takes the case OF patent and says
that our plan would interfere with patents.
What is Mr., Hughes trying to do? Is he
to deceive those who listen to him2 Our
anti-trust. plank has nothing to do with
patepts, The patent is intended to be a
monopoly, and our reference to patents
in another part OF the platform 10 sufficient
proof that the convention had no inten-
ton OF including the patent in the opera
ton Of an antitrust law
Il explained this some weeks ago when
the objection was first made, but the
objection was 80 silly that did not sup
pose 1t would be made by any one
with any sense OF responsibility. Does
Mr. Hughes really think that our anti
trust plank was Intended TO apply TO a
patent or is he 30 hard pressed for argu-
ments that he must use that argument
anyhow
"A patent grants monopoly for a
limited time as reward for an invention.
The trusts that we are opposed to have