How the People Struggle With

Monopoly.

Macaulay, speaking of Charles I, said: "No man is fit to rule over a people who listens to the few who have access to him as against the many whom he will never see." He might have said, further, that no people ever wisely gave the right to government to favor the few who have access to it as the expense of the many whom its officials will never see. Such a power reposed in government is a danger to democratic government. Such a power in government is despotic in its very nature, and under its exercise government cannot but become more and more centralized. Such centralization has been the tendency in both state and national government in recent years. (Franklin Pierce, The Tariff and the Trusts, Page 135).

IN THE SENATE THIRTY-TWO YEARS AGO

In his speech against the railway rate bill Mr. Foraker said that conditions might be worse. Mr. Tillman remarked: "Well, the people are squealing." Mr. Foraker retorted: "If the Senator had been here during the Cleveland administration he would have heard them squealing long and loud."

The people have "squealed" at various times on this railroad question, and they have for many years, even long prior to the Cleveland administration, had good reasons for "squealing."

Recently they debated this question in the United States Senate as though it were some new proposition, yet thirty-two years 2go-in 1874-the United States Senate, complying with what was then, as now, known as "popular clamor," appointed a committee to investigate. This committee was known as "the Committee on Transportation Routes," and was composed of these Senators: William Windom, of Minnesota; John Sherman, of Ohio; Roscoe Conkling, of New York; H. G. Davis, of West Virginia; T. M. Norwood, of Georgia; J. W. Johnson, of Virginia; John H. Mitchell, of Oregon, and S. B. Conover, of Florida.

This Committee held session during the summer of 1874, and made a report from which the following extract is taken :

"In the matter of taxation, there are to-day four men, representing the four great trunk lines between Chicago and New York, who possess, and who not unfrequently exercise powers which the Congress of the United States would not venture to exert. They may at any time, and for any reason satisfactory to themselves, by a single stroke of the pen, reduce the value of property in this country by hundreds of millions of dollars. An additional charge of five cents per bushel, on the transportation of cereals, would have been equivalent to a tax of forty-five millions of dollars on the crop of 1873. No Congress would dare to exercise so vast a power except upon a necessity of the most imperative nature, and yet these gentlemen exercise it whenever it suits their supreme will and pleasure. without explanation or apology. With the rapid and inevitable progress of combination and consolidation, these colossal organizations are daily becoming stronger and more imperious. The day is not distant, if it has not already arrived, when it will be the duty of the statesmen to inquire whether there is less danger in leaving the property and industrial interests of the people thus wholly at the mercy of a few men who recognize no responsibility but to their stockholders, and no principle of action but personal and corporate aggrandizement. than in adding somewhat to the power and patronage of a government directly responsible to the people, and entirely under their control."

So it seems the people were "squealing" thirty-two years ago. Thirty-two years ago a Committee composed of such distinguished Republicans as William Windom, John Sherman and Roscoe Conkling, declared that four men, representing the four great trunk Baes between Chicago and New York, Possessed, and not infrequer

ly exercised, powers which the Congress of the United States would not venture to exert. Has the situation improved since Senators Windom, Sherman and Conkling subscribed to this startling statement, coming as it did from public men in a free Government?

The evils of which Messrs. Windom, Sherman and Conkling complained were infinitesimal when compared with the evils of today. The power held by the monopolists of that day was small compared with the power held by the monopolists of the present time.

Thirty-two years ago the situation was so grave that these distinguished Americans suggested the inquiry "whether there is less danger in leaving the property and industrial interests of the people wholly at the mercy of a few men who recognize no responsibility but to their stockholders, and no principle of action but personal and corporate aggrandizement, than in adding somewhat to the power and patronage of a Government directly responsible to the people and entirely under their control. "Yet no remedy has been provided, and every effort to give the people relief has been vigorously resisted by the representatives of these special interests.

NINETY-FIVE PER CENT OF RAILROAD STOCK IS WATER. Following is a special dispatch to the Chicago Record-Herald, which dispatch every Democrat ought to show to his Republican neighbor:

New York, April 23.-When Thomas F. Ryan was before the special grand jury investigating the affairs of the Metropolitan Street Railway company he said that ninety-five per cent of the stock of all railroad corporations in this country never cost a dollar.

There was great surprise and many of the jurors questioned Mr. Ryan, believing that they had misunderstood, but the only one in the room who manifested no surprise was Mr. Jerome, who before Mr. Ryan appeared before the jury had carefully gone over all the testimony with him.

Ryan's remark was made after Mr. Jerome had read to the grand jury the statement prepared by the witness, which Ryan gave out for publication last Monday evening.

Why Ryan's statement was read by Jerome has not been explained. Some said Ryan was not a good reader; others that his voice was not as penetrating as Jerome's.

Ryan had figured out that the $52,000,000 of Metropolitan Street Railway stock represented cash payments of 832 per cent of its par value. As Mr. Jerome read this statement Ryan interrupted, saying: "Gentlemen, that is the answer to the statement that has been made for the last five years that the Metropolitan Street Railway company stock is all water."

Mr. Jerome promptly came to the witness' rescue, saying: "Mr. Ryan, you have been connected with a large number of corporate ventures, both in street railways and in steam railways, have you not?"

"Yes, sir," answered Ryan.

"And as a banker you have been familiar with the capitalization of many of the railroads of this country, have you not?"

"Yes, sir."

"How will that compare-that percentage of water, if you call it such?"

"Ninety-five per cent of the stock of railroad corporations of this country never cost a dollar," was Mr. Ryan's declaration. "You mean," said Mr. Jerome, "that ninety-five per cent of the stock of the railroads of this country is all water?"

"Yes!"

"Please explain," said Mr. Jerome.

"Well," said Mr. Ryan, "the railroads in the last of these great speculative years that we have had have put up stock so that it was easy to raise money on stocks and bonds; but up to 1885 ninetyfive per cent of all steam railroads and all street railroads and all industrial corporations of this country never put in one dollar on their stock except a little organization expenses that were required for a few shares of stock in the beginning."

"So then," said Mr. Jerome, "your experience in these matters is that $83.50 cash paid in for every $100 in stock is exceptional?"

"Yes, sir. Up to 1878 there was not a dollar paid in on St. Paul, Northwestern, Omaha or any of these railroads.'

Mr. Jerome asked Mr. Ryan for a further explanation, but the witness waited until the district attorney put another question.

"If you took these roads as they stand to-day, including the roads that have been organized and supposed to be put on a sound basis, taking them as a whole, both in steam railroading and surface railroading, would $83.50 in cash for every share of $100 par be a large percentage of cash?"

"A large percentage," replied Mr. Ryan. "Ninety per cent of them haven't had anything. Not only that, in the reorganization that took place from 1900 up to 1907, they assessed these stocks and gave bonds."

"Mr. Ryan," said one of the grand jurors, "we understand then that the roads only cost about five per cent of the capital issue? They were built with bonds?"

"Built with bonds,' said Mr. Ryan. "The Union Pacific railroad is built with bonds and got a land grant worth $250,000,000." "And Atchison the same?" asked another grand juror. "Atchison the same."

"A MORAL ISSUE."

Mr. Stuyvesant Fish, late president of the Illinois Central Railroad, is reported to have said some very good things in a speech recently made at a banquet at Orange, N. J. Mr. Fish said:

"The contest is no longer between those who have and those who have not, but between those on the one hand who have moderately, sufficiently and even abundantly, and on the other those who, through the use of trust funds and the power incident thereto, seek by questionable practices to have excessively. This is the issue which is daily brought into every home in America. Like taxation without representation, it involves moral and ethical questions, and also strikes at the pocketbook, which has been called the sure road to the Anglo-Saxon's heart. It will not down. Great and repeated efforts have been made to quiet and hush the clamor which is rising on this subject. Such efforts may succeed for a time, but not in the end. It is not for me to say, in the words of Patrick Henry, 'Gentlemen may cry peace, peace, but there is no peace,' nor yet, 'Shall we lie supinely on our backs until the enemy shall have bound us hand and foot?' No, a thousand times no! I cannot and will not stir your minds up to a sense of wrong. Such is not my purpose, nor is this the forum for an appeal against unjust wealth. You and I have too large a stake in it to risk adding to the danger into which it has been brought by the malfeasance of some of our agents. What I do want is to bring to your attention the fact that no apparently effective thing has been done to right the wrongs which are known to exist, and that it rests with us, the great middle class, to meet this issue as our fathers met those which confronted them, soberly, advisedly and in fear of God. Let us do and say nothing rash, but, relying upon past experiences, move forward as people who 'know their rights, and knowing dare maintain.'

999

Mr. Fish declared that a moral issue is involved, and he waxed eloquent and quoted from Patrick Henry. It is a noble speech. Mr. Fish is one of the rich men of the country-at least, he would have been considered rich a few years ago, although he may not be rich when his wealth is measured against the wealth of some of our trust magnates. He has recently had some experience with the manipulators of the railroads and he was worsted in the contest. His defeat seems to have opened his eyes as to what is going on in this country, and he sounds a note of warning. The fact that he makes this protest is one of the signs of the times. The distinction which he draws is a very proper one. There is no antagonism in this country to honest wealth, no matter how much a man makes, if he makes it honestly and gives to society an equivalent service. He will be protected in the enjoyment of his wealth. There is a sense of justice among the American people to which the successful man can appeal if his success is merited, but it is time that a distinction was made between money honestly accumulated and money which has been stolen. It is time that the honest men who have made fortunes in legitimate business separate themselves from the predatory classes and join with the masses in putting an end to exploitation. A few years ago many of the small business men felt that they must take the side of the big financiers. They are learning that the big financiers are a class by themselves, and that their schemes contemplate the enrichment of the few at the expense of the many.

Mr. Fish probably regards his expulsion from the Illinois Central directorate as a misfortune, but if that misfortune makes him an apostle of reform, the public may well rejoice over the misfortune. Mr. Fish has been on the inside, and he knows something of the methods of these men who have been syndicating a Nation's prosperity and monopolizing the opportunities of the country. May his conscience prompt him to speak, and to speak often, if he has more messages like the one recently delivered.

THE HANDFUL OF MEN WHO RULE AMERICA.

Senator La Follette concluded his speech against the Aldrich bill March 24, 1908. The Associated Press tells the story in this

way:

Washington, March 24.—Upon the conclusion of Senator La Follette's speech on the Aldrich currency bill in the Senate to-day, a plan was decided upon by which Senator Aldrich will to-morrow move to take up the bill and continue its consideration until it has been disposed of. Mr. Aldrich asked for adjournment Thursday, but to that proposition Senator La Follette objected on the ground that he feared debate would be curtailed by such a procedure.

The colloquy which resulted in Mr. Aldrich's announcement followed the conclusion of the third and last installment of Senator La Follette's speech in opposition to the Aldrich bill. Mr. La Follette declared that his statement that the industries of this country were controlled by less than one hundred men had been attacked as sensational. Declaring that such was not the case, he Isaid that he had been too conservative, and that in fact a much smaller number of men dominate the industries.

"Along with this enormous increase in trust power, has gone a steady process of centralization in the control of that power, until now the entire situation is dominated by the 'Standard Oil-Morgan combination,' "he declared. "The old fights between these two great powers have been laid aside. Mr. Morgan's picture adorns the wall of the inner room of the Rockefellers at 26 Broadway. In combination to-day, they are working together to gather in the smaller powers. Mr. Hill has been taught that he must not oppose the big ones. The Standard Oil got in on the Great Northern ore deal. The Gould interests are being swallowed by the combine. Morse and Heinze were neatly pocketed during the recent panic.

"The smelter_ trust was given a drubbing and started in the same direction. The Vanderbilts can no longer retain their important control and themselves see the handwriting on the wall."

The Senator quoted John Moody to show an enormous growth in trust consolidation and capitalization in four years. In 1904 Mr. Moody placed the capitalization of the industrial franchise and railroad trusts at over $20,000,000,000. That amount has increased more than $11,000,000,000, or more than 55 per cent. The $31,000,000,000, he said, did not represent the financial combinations, bank and trust and insurance companies.

Mr. La Follette read the names of eminent financiers to whom he accorded various degrees of power in the control of industries. He included Senator Depew, of New York, as among those who exercised large power and held many directorships in the form of delegated power exercised by him in a mere representative capacity. Mr. Depew was in his seat, and general laughter followed the mention of his name.

Mr. La Follette named as next after Mr. Morgan and the Rockefellers, a group of fourteen men, who, he said, were "big operators and men of large power and interests in their own rights." These men, he said, find their best interests "in working in harmony with Morgan and Standard Oil." No combination which they could form among themselves or with others could cope with that power, he declared.

In this list of fourteen he placed W. K. Vanderbilt, August Belmont, Frederick Weyerhauser, Henry C. Frick, J. Ogden Armour, George Gould, Jacob Schiff, E. H. Harriman, Thomas F. Ryan, Louis S. Swift, John Jacob Astor, James Speyer, James J. Hill and W. H. Moore.

A second class of men in the list were the "stars of lesser magnitude," but men of wealth and power who work in with the combine and a few of the higher rank of attorneys and bank presidents of the system. This group follows:

C. H. Dodge, C. H. McCormick, Stephen S. Palmer, Brayton Ives, C. A. Peabody, G. F. Baker, J. F. Dryden, J. S. Post, H. Taylor Pyne, T. H. Hubbard, G. G. Haven, W. R. Oakman, F. J. Berwynd, J. B. Duke, P. A. Valentine, W. D. Sloan, Adrian Iselin, Jr., Frederick Cromwell, G. W. Young, C. Ladyard Blair, D. Guggenheim, V. P. Snyder, A. H. Brady, Edwin Hawley, D. O. Mills, Charles Steele, John J. Waterbury, Oliver Ames, Nathaniel Thayer, E. H. Gary, John C. Laflin, John R. Hageman, C. H. Mackay, W. K. Vanderbilt, J. J. Mitchell, T. Jefferson Coolidge, Thomas Dolan, Samuel Lea, Chester Lanier, James C. Fargo, D. O. Reid, Henry Walters, Norman B. Ream, H. L. Higginson, P. A. B. Widener, and F. B. Morris.

Of the third group, including the balance of the lists, Senator La Follette said: "While some of them exercise large power and hold many directorships, it is a delegated power exercised by them in a mere representative capacity."

This part of the list is as follows: Edwin S. Marston, G. W. Perkins, John S. Sterling, Otto H. Kahn, John F. Jarvis, A. W. Krotch, Paul Morton, H. C. Deming, Charles H. Russell, Chauncey M. Depew, Oliver H. Payne, W. S. Babb, James B. Foran, Moses Taylor, Francis M. Bacon, James Stillman, Luther Kountze, H. P. Whitney, Paul D. Cravath, Levi P. Morton, N. N. Vreeland, W. Godhue Langdon, C. W. Morse, Charles M. Schwab, E. F. C. Young, J. H. Converse, H. A. C. Taylor, C. S. Fairchild, G. S. Whitson, A. D. Guillard, G. H. Allen, V. Moritz, J. H. Parker, Frederick Sturgus, C. N. Bliss, A. Forr, H. Mack Twombly, Charles Dawes and S. R. Shipley.

THE REPUBLICAN RECORD.

The Columbia (S. C.) State shudders to think what the Republican party would do to the Democratic party in the next election if the position of the two parties were reversed. The State then proceeds to point out the Republican record, as follows:

"Seven years of profitless, unintelligent malefactor baiting, with not a malefactor yet landed in jail. Seven years of wild, excited and loud-mouthed struggle with the forces of 'predatory wealth,' with no better result to show for it all than a senseless and unreasonable panic brought about in a year of big crops and abundant material prosperity; one hundred thousand unemployed in the city of New York alone, with the prospect before the winter is over of the necessary establishment of the free soup kitchen so dreaded by political parties; hard times, 'tight' money and a large degree of business pessimism."

To this the State might have added: “A situation full of peril with no better remedy to offer than no-cent dollars of the asset currency brand; a railway merger declared illegal in the courts, but allowed to continue under another name; a trust breeding tariff that the administration dare not touch for fear of being deprived of a fund to finance its campaign; a big stick policy that has had as results only the organization of Ananias clubs, the enumeration of undesirable citizens and the scolding of trained naval officers." Such a record would condemn the Democratic party to deserved defeat. It remains to be seen whether the people will call the guilty. party to account.

TOO MUCH POWER.

The Wall Street Journal says that E. H. Harriman is, perhaps, the most powerful individual in the United States, not even excepting the President. The Journal explains: "His power is absolute over about 15,000 miles of railroad having a capitalization of about $1,100,000,000. His authority is very large over 13,000 additional miles of road having a capitalization of $1,200,000,000, while he has a potent voice in the management of 38,000 miles of road having a capitalization of $1,600,000,000. Thus directly and indirectly his