The farmers are waking up to it. Here is a telegram that I received from a farmers' organization in my State an hour ago: MADISON, Wis., May 22, 1914. Hon. JOHN M. NELSON, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Our society, 12,000 strong, is counting on you at this time to champion the cause of agriculture in Wisconsin, which has already suffered from tariff legislation, by leading in enacting laws favorable to cooperation. Be sure to provide in impending antitrust legislation for free and unhampered cooperation in assembling, grading, standardizing, packing, storing, and marketing farm products. Agriculture must be permitted to do its business cooperatively; and business can not be done without capital. Would not a general provision permitting all cooperative business activities where all profits above operating expenses are returned to the patrons, producers, and consumers solve the problem? Anyway, it must be solved to save our greatest and most important industry in effecting economies in distributing and to protect consumers from unlimited exploitation. CHAS. A. LYMAN, Legislative Committee Wisconsin State Union Time will not permit me to of this compromise measure. out its real character. American Society for Equity. discuss more fully the provisions Sufficient has been said to bring THE SMALL BUSINESS MAN. Mr. Chairman, what will be the effect of the enactment of this legislation upon the life and happiness of the American people? Will the small business man, the merchant, and the independent manufacturer receive this act with joy? There are no such indications. The small merchant, with his back against the wall, fighting for his very existence, came to the committee and through his representatives plead for relief against the crushing power of concentrated capital in the form of chain stores and department stores and big monopolies. What have you given him in this bill? Absolutely nothing. The independent manufacturer asked for larger business freedom. He may have mistaken his remedy, but what relief do you afford him in this measure? You arbitrarily place upon his business new restrictions that are vague, indefinite, and full of tempting loopholes. You burden, harass, and annoy needlessly independent, honest business. Surely the small business man, the merchant, and the manufacturer will not bless you for your efforts. ORGANIZED LABOR. Organized labor, representing millions of our countrymen who live by the toil of their hands in the sweat of their brows, have asked you to relieve them of being classified with capital. Their labor is part of their life, inseparable from them; and they have told you truly that it was not the intent of the framers of the Sherman law to classify their organizations with monopolies. It was organized labor that helped to put the administration into power. It asked for bread, but you gave it a bone. You pretend to exempt the workingmen from the law, but they know that your language is empty and meaningless, and that they are still subject to all its pains and penalties. Already their murmur of protest is being heard, but the President, so the press reports, will not allow you to give them relief. The great army of THE FARMER. farmers-will they thank you for this legislation? Not at all. They do not love you overly much now. You turned them over in your tariff bill to the tender mercies of competition with foreign countries. Through their representatives and organizations they joined labor in asking that the products of their toil be not classified with capital. Organizations of farmers are not trusts, no more than unions of laborers, and the Sherman law was not intended to apply to them. Farmers have acted separately and individually heretofore, and in consequence the return for their toil has been a pittance. Our progressive farmers everywhere are beginning to understand the value of acting together. Evidence was presented to the committee that East and West, North and South the farmers are cooperating to buy in larger quantities and to secure better prices through collective bargaining, but this bill puts this movement of the farmers under the ban of the law. THE CONSUMER. The consumers, your special protégés of the past, what of them? How they love you for reducing the high cost of living! You said it was due to the tariff; but has the cost of living come down? It was not the tariff, and you know it now. It was monopoly privilege; the power of the trusts to levy unjust tribute. Now, though you have the power, you weakly compromise. Will the consumers praise this measure? No; like lukewarm water they will spew it out of their mouths with disgust. WALL STREET. This bill is satisfactory only to Wall Street. You may have placated organized plutocracy temporarily. Big business appears to be satisfied, because you have done nothing. But you know that this bill will not stand the test of time. Many of you realize this, but you dare not run counter to the wishes of your master in the White House. You fear that the people will misunderstand your attitude if you go against the President. Do you not realize that his power is due to the confidence of the people in the sincerity of his promise to destroy private monopoly? When the people learn that it is the truth-what the Wall Street bankers are saying-that "the President is the most conservative force in Washington," the party responsible for this craven compromise will reap the whirlwind. You were intrusted with the fullest power. You had an unequaled opportunity; but when the time came you lacked the courage for a thoroughgoing solution of the great monopoly problem. You have disturbed everything; you have settled nothing. As one who with others began the fight against monopoly privilege and special interests and for the rule of the people and the rights of all more than 20 years ago and has followed the fight up to this moment, I say to you your action will not meet with public approval. The people will come to understand your unpardonable temporizing policy. Men who will not compromise for the sake of political expediency will take your place of power. The great fight between the mass of the American people, seeking to restore competition, and the privileged class, still retaining monopoly control, will go on, and it will end only when it is indeed made "impossible for private monopoly to exist in the United States." [Applause.] The Delusion of Section 5 of the Trade Commission Bill. REMARKS OF HON. KNUTE NELSON, OF MINNESOTA, IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, July 13, 1914. The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, had under consideration the bill (H. R. 15613) to create an interstate trade commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes. Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I have listened with astonishment to the remarkable speech of the Senator from Nevada [Mr. NEWLANDS]. One would think, after listening to his remarks, that the sort of Pooh-Bah commission proposed by the pending bill will have greater powers and will be more effective against trusts and combinations in this country than all our courts combined. Most of the leading trusts in this country have been prosecuted in the courts. The Sugar Trust is now in the courts, and testimony is being taken in that suit; the Harvester Trust is in the courts; the Steel Trust is in the courts; the Tobacco and the Standard Oil cases have been decided by the courts, and there are a number of other trust cases pending. Judging from the remarks of the Senator from Nevada, he infers that the proposed trade commission is to constitute a great remedy for the suppression of trusts. The opinion seems to prevail in some quarters that if you give the proposed commission ample power it will do more to suppress trusts and monopolies in this country than all the courts of the country combined; and yet what jurisdiction is given the commission? Its activities are confined simply to one feature of what occurs in the case of a trust or a monopoly. These trusts and monopolies, as a rule, are formed under the corporation laws of the several States. If we had no corporation laws, if men could do business only as individuals or as partnerships, it would be impossible to form these great corporations. They are formed through the corporation laws of the several States; and after these monopolies have been formed and established a part of their work, in many instances, is to drive out competitors from the field, and the few they have not been able to absorb in their combination they seek to drive out by unfair competition. What does the Senator from Nevada propose to do with his bill? What is the trust remedy he proposes? Why, as I said a moment ago, it is only to nibble at one side of the trust. It is simply to reach the matter of unfair competition. Suppress that, and you have accomplished the whole thing, according to the idea of the Senator from Nevada. You still leave the |