OCR Text |
Show A BRYAN VAGARY. fl Mr. Bryan evidently has not yet read careful- j fl ly the decision in the Merger case. He thinks I I "the trust question can be made an Important fl issue in the coming campaign if the Democrats fl will do their duty." fl He wants suits begun indiscriminately, and fl says: "The Democrats in the Senate and House fl might well paraphrase Cato's famous saying and fl each day demand a vote on a resolution declar- fl ing that 'private monopolies must be destroyed.' " Suppose such a resolution were to be offered and . m some Republican were to ask why the sudden I excitement and point out that the anti-trust law I Hffjlff )'lfffll i was passed before Mr. Cleveland's last nomlna- HUl hI'ibI ' on and tlmt unt,er the vigilant eye of Mr. Ol- Mfllli If If Is 1 ney n'8 aorncy general, lie could not in four BHiih irHl years find any reason for even trying to enforce Hnifi ' v 1 1 I lt what answer could be given? Again, under 113 Inl'lai ! tlmt dec5sIon now ls a Private monopoly to be fni 'P If ! '' destroyed unless it works a restraint upon trade? Bw i "I M 1 ,t For instance, Senator Clark of Montana came r ' m 1 V here some years ago. Ho said, modestly, that he Br f I ' was eniynS - generous income and had deter- ! , '' m I mined to build and equip a firm-class railroad to Hli A I mM' i connect this city with Los Angeles and the Port Hi ' Ulivm ( of an e(ir0. Suppose he had done that. It Hi iifuV ' ' I would have been a private monopoly would it wl jirl'jnM: nt? He would have had the exclusive carrying I iMlilB' ' trade between the coast and a flourishing city 700 ' lllffl miles in the interior and all the local traffic be- ' H 9r ! tween those points and would, moreover, have had W fh l fa ' , a monopoly that every traveler between those cit- '' ? Hi " es anc every producer along the long line of that B! II 1 n H road woul(1 have been forced to pay tribute to. But H' tisi H1 ' doeg r' Bryan know of any law that could "de- ' " l'Si 8' '' ' stroy that monopoly?" Could he frame any just H j u ' law tliat could destroy a monopoly of that kind? K ltS! fl1 1 Surely the anti-trust law under which the Merger V tlw la I case was tried has no power to interfere with a 1 '111 if monopoly of that kind. The States through which Ifllil 18 1 I ue road Passec could interpose and prescribe lj I , maximum rates to be charged for fares or freights , 'ft ml M on the score that the road was a common carrier H Pi If anc na s cnarter imposed an implied obligation K S h 'II ' tna snoul treat its patrons fairly. But that B h At I would be as far as any limitation, short of con- H i ''' I It w I demnation and purchase could be made. As to H I ''' I :ll I I tllG mPortfint issue in the. campaign" which can Hi i si If I ! e made out f the trust question, if the Demo- H I r II M I I crats will do their duty," see how that very able Bit tHli j 11 II i Democratic newspaper the New York World '., 'j 'K tj; H I V i all I looks upon it. It says: Hi lilii Hi I "TnG anti'trust law was framed by a Republi- HI''1'- rrl HlM " can' Passe( by a Republican Congress, signed by a Republican President and permited to remain a dead letter during all of Cleveland's second term, when Richard Olney, a Democrat, was Attorney At-torney General. "The first effort at enforcement was by a Republican Re-publican Attorney General, at the instance of a Republican President and its validity was affirmed af-firmed by five Republican members of the Supreme Su-preme Court, three Democrats dissenting.' We suspect that Mr. Bryan is much more of a Populist than he is Democrat. |