Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1913-05-23


err. The latter for a few hours now
has quit the company OF the tariff.
but the two companions will get to-
gether once more shortly and the
capital and the capitol will present
again the scenes Of recent summers.
1t is the same old tariff drama over
again in the same setting and with a
good many new faces among the minor
actors.
A good many of the members of
congress say with a perfect abandon
of frankness that it is just as well
the dominant ones limited general de-
bate to a few days and will limit
debate under the five-minute rule to
only few days more. Even such
tariff patriots as Mr. Payne and Mr..
Fordney it is said are glad in their
hearts that the thing as far as the
house is concerned is to be over
quickly.
No Friction There.
While some persons who seem
always to be hooking for a row have
found on several occasions symptoms
of friction between President Wilson
and one or two Of his cabinet officers
nothing really has developed yet in
the way of trouble which any oppo-
nent of the president could lay his
finger on and say here is where they
come to the'parting of the ways"
These seemingly are the plain facts
in the case thus far, and men OF all
parties here say that as far as peace
and concord in the cabinet are con-
cerned they are there to sit at the
family council table twice a week and
probably to be present wheneYer the
official ones get together on other
occasions in between.
There seemingly, however, has been
slight difference of opinion on the
face of things between Attorney Gen
eral McReynolds and the president
Note that it is said on the face OF
things, but nothing has happened to
show that Mr.. Wilson up to date does
not agree with his cabinet officer. The
seeming difference lies in the fact that
Mr.. Wilson on one or two occasions
has expressed views which seem to
be counter to those expressed by Mr.
McReynolds in a specific case.
The attorney general has said that
the case of the American Telephone
and Telegraph company, charged with
being monopoly in restraint OF
trade, or something much like that,
should be referred to the interstate
commerce commission instead Of go
ing the way of prosecution. Does this
mean that there is radical difference
of opinion on trust matters between
President Wilson and his attorney
general? It seems to be a case in
which Mr.. McReynolds believes that
regulation rather than prosecution
should be used in dealing with Ger
tain kinds of alleged trust cases.
There are some people who hold that
the telephone is a natural monopoly
and that therefore 1t should be sub
ject to regulation rather than to court
procedure.
Believes In Competition
In an article which Mr.. Wilson
wrote for a magazine he stood against
seemingly, at least, that for which his
cabinet officer has just chosen to en-.
dorse. The president apparently be
lieves in return to competitive con
ditions, but whether his views on com
petition extend to concerns like tele-
phone companies is not yet to be de
/ cided.
Mr.. McReynolds, the present attor.
ney general, was appointed to an OF.
fee In the attorney generals depart
ment by Theodore Roosevelt Mr..
Roosevelt, it is known. believes that
big business affairs should be looked
after by a commission similar to
the interstate commerce commission
which regulates common carrier mat.
ters 1t is possible that Mr.. Nc
Reynolds took his view of the tele.
phone case from Mr.. Roosevelt, but
at any rate wherever he got it, Wash.
ington is yet waiting to see il he and
the president are to come to logger
heads over 1t.
The president OF the United States
believes in a return to competitive
methods. His tariff bill, his party
members say, shows that he wants
things about upon a competitive
basis. The natural thing to suppose
is that he wants to extend his plan
Of competition to the great corpora.
tions of the United States as they
exist today.
There seems to be no doubt what.
ever that at the beginning of the
next regular session a bill to do away
with trust conditions in the United
States will be introduced in the lower
house of congress and the chances are
also that a similar bill will be intro
duced into the upper house. What
is going to become of either the one
or the other?