Show COCKRAN ON TRUSTS the forensic contest on tonight between bourke cockran the irish orator who left the democratic parly in 1890 to support mckenley and wm J dry an the leader of the democracy places the question of trusts in politics and ostensibly democracy Is to stand for antitrust anti trust and force the republicans into the of defending the great combines but this la only a matter of misrepresentation As a prominent republican statesman has observed during tha past few yeara the republicans have been anoro active against trusts than the democrats the fifty third congress democratic did not a finger against them and it was left to a republican congress to pass the sherman antitrust anti trust law last winter and spring the most drastic laws for the suppression of these great combines were passed kiy republican legislatures the one exception proving tho rule being the legislature of texas As a matter ot fact there 13 no politics in trusts they are no more republican and no less democratic than partnerships are what are the politics of the anaconda copper corn pany the standard oil the sugar trust and the diamond match company the democrats lay especial stress not only upon hanna but graggs but what la the offense of the republican attorney general he refused aa in duty bound to make a federal matter out of a wrong which could look tor lawful redress courts his democratic predecessor richard did worse aa Is shown by the following from the san francisco ax a organ ill 13 probable that the indifference or hostility of the attorney generals of the united slates to the antitrust anti trust lawa of the statutes to accomplish anything attorney general olney frankly stated his that the sharman law was unconstitutional and the remarkable decision ot the supreme court in the sugar trust case to the effect that the power ot the united states over interstate commerce applied only to persons and corporations whose principal business Is handling goods for sale and not to those whose principal business Is manufacturing and that the sugar trusts bustnes busl nes was mainly manufacturing and not selling sugar seemed to support it how can republican attorney general graggs attitude compromise his party any more than democratic attorney general Ol it Is idle and in some debrea vicious to talk of trusts as the wards and pets of parties they are no more so than corporations it they are harmful the damage falls alike upon the republican and democrat it advantageous the profits and rewards are common to both much interest will attach to to nights debate and we are curious to know just how bryan be able to make politics out of trusts without attributing to republicanism that which is not republicanism and excusing democracy from many of its past responsibilities bili ties |