The Lafayette advertiser. [volume] (Vermilionville [i.e. Lafayette], La.) 1865-19??, 1908-07-07
WHAT BRYAN THINKS THE
MATTER is AND HOW TO
REMEDY 1T.

ton this week as the Democratic
nominee for president. the fol-
lowing extract from an interview
with Mr.. Bryan by Lincoln Stef-
fens published in the July
EvERYBoDY'S MAGAZINE. should
prove interesting.
Mr.. Steffens propounded the
question to Mr.. Bryan. What is
the matter in this country and
what do you propose we shall do
about it?" MI. Bryan's answer
in part and Mr.. Steffens' com
parison of Mr.. Bryan's ideas
with those of Sec. Taft, the Re
publican standard bearer, to
whom he had propounded the
same question, (the interview
was published in the June Every
body's) was as follows:
1.-The great economic evil to be rem
edied, then, is the unequal distribution
of wealth after it is created" He
calls the American people the most in
telligent producers in the world, and
he said we both produce and consume
twice as much as any equal pOpula-
ton. ssBut," he feared, inequality
of distribution will finally paralyze
production. For it will kill that
great stimulus to endeavor: the as
surance that the reward will be COM
mensurate with the effort"
Since unequal distribution is the
one, fundamental cause of u various
evils, what must the remedy be-?
s'The remedy" Mr.. Bryan said,
''must be found in an approach to
equity" And he took up 1.-TWO plans
that are under discussion, socialism
and individualism.
1.-THE Socialist he said, proposes
to eliminate the employer. The gov
ernment is to own and operate all in
strumentalities of production. and dis
tribution.
s'The Individualist says that COM
petition is the better regulating force,
and he proposes, therefore to restore
and safeguard competition.
Our action on ell political and eco
nomic questions depends upon which
Of these two points of view we take, y
he proceeded slowly. And he implied
that, consciously or uncOnsciously,
we all choose one or the other OF these
two positions. He used the trusts to
illustrate; and he showed how the pro-
m0ters of these great organizations
are making, unwittingly, of course,
but certainly, toward socialism.
1.-THE Socialists" Mr.. Bryan said
truly, ssare for the trusts. They be.
Ieve that competition is wasteful and
that there is an economical advantage
in monopoly; SO they propose that the
government, instead of DISCRIMINATING
trusts, should simply take possession,
and, by owning and operating them,
give to the whole people the benefits o.
monopoly"
Mr.. Bryan rested q moment, then he
proceeded:
"The I~ndividualist believes that the
condition, the very principle of pri.
vate monopoly should be exterminat
ed. Not the industry, of course; or
the contrary, the industry should bt
revived, increased, enlarged, upon
natural, stable foundation"
He was speaking, observe, not nov
of public-service monOpOlies: rail
roads, light, water and gas. These
he wished to leave till later in the in
teryiew, and, as we shall see, he pro.
posed to try to regulate them. He wa
thinking now of merchandise trusts
oil, steel, paper, etc. He wOuldn'
even try to regulate them; they mus
be forbidden.
ssThose who advocate the govern
ment control of such trusts go hal
way to socialism. For they are grant
ing the Socialist contention that there
is an economic advantage in monopo
". They not only declare agalns
competition as q regulating force
they eliminate all questions but two:
ssFirst: whether the benefits of mo
nopoly shall be enjoyed by all the
people. or by only q few: and they will
hardly contend in the open for the few
So that we come to the
Second: Whether the state can Sc
cure to the people by regulation thu
benefits of monopoly. And if monop
oily is good and it can't be regulated
then public ownership is inevitable.
..And l believe" he decided, tina
regulation of monopolies will b.
found impossible. Their interests arr
SO large, their power is so concen
trated, their SO ample to cor
rupt and to force out competition
that the monopolists will have con
stantly an advantage over the people
at large, who, suffering each only
little bit, can be brought only by grea'
effort to an effective cooperation il
opposition. For example, politically
the candidate for Office will Away!
favor regulation, if that plan is de
cided upon, but the trusts can con
tribute so largely to campaign fund'
and al exert SO powerful an infu
ence over their employees that the maj
IN Office Is apt to listen to the trusts
rather than to the people. This is ex
nctly what has happened, what hap
pens now, and it will happen in tn
THUS. then, Mr.. Bryan came t,
fwo clear conclusions:
n M That the trusts are, and tina
xhey must continue to be, the grea