Indiana State Sentinel, Indianapolis, Marion County, 25 December 1889 — Page 6

G

THE INDIANA STATE SENTINEL, WEDNESDAY. DECEMBER 25. 1889.

JIB. TÜRPIE AGAINST TRUSTS

DENOUNCING MONOPOLY'S SCHEME. o Trust Wn Etr Formed With VUw to the Public Interest" A Sjstem of Legalized ltlackiuail on the Public A Vigorous Arraignment ot Trust. Senator Turpie's resolution on the subject of trusts, offered ia the senate on the C'th inst., is aa follows : ltesolved, That the proposed penal enactments against trusts affecting commerce anion? the several states, should provide tor the seizure of trust goods as such, upon lawful warrant and information, and for the forfeiture, confiscation and the sale of the same upon due processof trial and hearing, it' they he adjudged and found to besuch; the proceeds tobe paid into the treasury of the United States, less the cost of prosecution. On the 10th inst. Senator Turpie spoke to this resolution as follows in the senate: Mr. President, a trust in the most recent acceptation of the term, is a union or combination, rarely of individuals, usually of corporations, dealing in or producing a certain commodity, of the total amount of tvhich belonging to them a common stock is made, with the intention of holding and polling the same at an enhanced price, by suppressing or limiting the supply and by other devices, so that the price of such trust commodity shall depend merely upon the agreement made about it by those in the combination, without reference to the cost of its production, the quantity of the article held for consumption, or the demand therefor among buyers. The act of fixing the price of the commodity, the ultimate result of this confederated association, and sometimes the handling of its goo Is and funds, are intrusted to one or more jersonp, called the (syndicate, or executive committee, from which intrusting the scheme takes its name. The ultimate fixing of a price upon the common stock is done without the least consideration of any legitimate element either of a sale or purchase in the open market and depends for its efficiency not upon any law or known rule of trade or commerce, but only upon the binding force, tenor and tension of the trust agreement. Those in the management of such unions and combinations are generally supposed to be engaged only in the handling of materials and finished products, but in a larger sense they are also purchasing labor at the lowest price and selling it at the highest. Where one person, or a small number of persons, a syndicate of trust directors, under the influence of corporate interests, has the adjustment of the wasres of thousands of operatives in a particular line, as compared with the multitude of "workmen competing with each other for employment, the result is in no manner doubtful, the advantage must rest with the one employer representing the closely covenanted league of wealth and resources. So that the operation of such a trust practically controls the prices of both wares and wages without regard to the real value of either. And these effects, it is to be noted, are not casual, but are expressiv designed as the aim and object of such combinations. It is claimed that the trust, instead of being an evil, is a benefit, a blessing to the public; that it has furnished goods to the people more cheaply than other methods, or that it has furnished commodities that tinder other circumstances would not have been procurable. But these instances are exceedingly rare. They occur only when there had been a rift or disagreement among the parties to the coalition, and the trust market has been in consequence of it broken, or when there has been an unusual depression iu the price of materials OUt of which trust goods are manufactured so as to cause outride production w hich the combination could not control. These fio-called benefits flowing from the trust have not been in any pcr.se legitimate results of its own action; on the contrary, they have been only felt and realized when, by an irresistible pressure, external competition has fractured the effective parts of the trust scheme and has wrecked its design and purpose. Jvo trust was ever formed with a view to the public interest. To suppose this is not only an error in fact, mistaking occaBional advantages to the public occurring despite the trust for its legitimate effects, but it is also a grievious error in policy, confounding the results of monopoly with those ot full and fair competition. This Is only the repetition of a very old pretense, made by every system of tyranny ever practiced, that it is for the good of the ferf. Where the market is open, if one man geta a better price for his goods than another in the same line, it must be on the account of the excellence of the wares, and even then he can only sell at a fair profit, because others may soon equal him. But the trusted man or men of such a combination as that spoken of in charge of the horded commodities of his particular plant shuts out all rivals from the market, seizes the exclusive sale of things essential to production and improvement, and threatens a whole line of trade with total withdrawal of supply 8a ve upon his own terms. It is very clear that in this case, the ordinary case of trusts, the price w hich they demand is an exaction from necessity of fear; the sum of their profits depends upon the numlter of persoi.3 tiiey can injure, the sort of injury they can inflict, and the amount of money the victims may have at their disposal. The blackmail which a freebooter extorts is not paid as a benefit, although it incidentally may prove to be one. It ia paid not aa a good, but as an evil, to escape a greater. The federal constitution contains no prorieion concerning the limitation of the accumulation of property by the citizen, cither real or personal. We cannot prevent one person, if he choose, from buying the whole of a certain commodity "and holding the Eame at bis own price. This woald be a strict monopoly, one probably beyond the means of our correction or control. But in the department of commerce remitted to congressional regulation "we may rightfully prevent two or more jiersons from combining for this purpose, und so prevent the unity of interest and the enhancement of prices they might agree to ask, which is the real and practical mischief now prevalent. It is not presumed that those engaged in business under a system of open competition have consciously in view the public interest; they doubtless seek and serve their own. Nevertheless long experience has shown that a number of sellers of the parae or similar commodities, each pursuing their private ends, do subserve the public interest, inducing equitable prices; reasonable neas of prices resulting from the several independent average of estimates by the whole numlxr of dealers. When we, therefore, provide by law, with respect to that species of trafhc which congress may regulate, that sellers shall not ls made one by a confederacy to increase prices, M e have made a strong and efficient provision in favor of fair, full, and unrestricted trade. It may be thought that such provision is an interference with what are called the business methods of certain classes in our mercantile and manufacturingcommunity, but as legislators we are concerned only w ith the public weal the general welfare. Whatever may le the vocation or calling of private citizens, or classes of citizens, the first business of government is to do justice, and to take care that it be done to the whole mass of the constituency which it represents. Hlackstone, in his Commentaries upon the Laws of England, under the classifica

tion of Public Wroncs, among other statements uses the following language: Forestalling the market is an otlense aeainst public trade. This which was also an ollense at common law is described hy statute to be the buying or contracting for any merchandise coming in the way to market, dissuading persons from brineing their goods th're, persuading them to ennauce the price when there, any oi which make the market dearer to the fair trader. Engrossing is described by statute to be eettinj into one's possession or buying up lare quantities of corn or other dead victuals with iuteut to sell again at an extraordinary price; and ho iiie total engrossing of any other commodity with an intent to sell it at an unreasonable price is an oiteuse indictable and finable at the common law. Monopolies are ranch the same offense in any other brunch of trade that engrossing is in provisions, and monopolists, except as to patents, are punishable with forfeiture of treble damaires and double costs. Monopolies are declared by statute to be contrary to law and void. Combinations also amoug fietualers to raise the price of provisions or other commodities are in many cases severely punished by particuler statutes. In the same manner, by a constitution of the Emperor Zeno, all monopolies and combinations to keep up the price of merchandise were prohibited npon pain of forfeiture ot goods and perpetual banishment, (lilackstone; subtitle, Public Wron?.) These references, if they serve no other purpose, show the antiquity of these evils and of attempted remedies therefor; that the legislative authority, even though not charged expressly with the power and duty of commercial regulation, as congress is, has exercised the same. Evil has not, by mere lapse of time, become eood; penalties grown old may be revived, if needed. A very ornamental nomenclature has been invented f.s a visor to disguise the features of the trust. Many thincs have been said about the extensive range and rapidity of modern trade, the exploits of incorporated capital and associated credit, and the. benefits of chartered combinations. The magnitude and celerity of modern commercial transactions is not a reason for less of good faith, honor and honesty, therein, hut for more of these elementary moralities of the market. A sale is defined to be the transfer of the property in a thing for a price in money. As it is one of the oldest, so it has been always accounted one of the most useful and advantageous of human transactions. A fair sale in an open market is a contract, and, like, other contracts, implies parties able to contract; it implies parley, treaty, negotiations, differences; and as a result of these, and in consequence of these, a mutual assent and agreement, especially as to the value of the thing offered, which is called the price, pai l ornromised. The system of trusts is founded upon the destruction and abrogation of the sale. The factor or broker disposing of trust commodities is not in any true sense a seller; he is only a sort ot commissary of subsistence, a purveyor of supplies "furnished upon a strict commission. The party who j rocures such goods is not a buyer; he is only a pensioner receiving his daily dole in return for a consideration, in the lixing of which he lias no voice nor choice. There is on the one hand a forced levy upon each consumer of a certain sum of money; on the other, an involuntary surrender to the duress of rapacity. Can such a transaction 1 rightfully called a sale? It may effect the transfer of property in the thing delivered; this is only one incident of the contract; it lacks every other. It is true the consumer in any case has one option he may decline to part with his money, and so not get the goods do without them. Hut tinder this option, made in every instance, commerce would wholly cease. The proposition of the trusts is that there shall be no commerce save upon their own conditions; for it is not only their theory but their practice to hold and own all the commodity inside the combination, so that if the article can not be forced upon the intending buyer it cannot be boucht elsewhere. The legislatures of the country by their silence and abstinence, the courts by their expressed decisions for centuries, have doclared they would not in the tht instance put values upon commodities. They would leave the parties to make their own bargain?, to treat about and adjust their own prices; but here is an authority which overrides that of the law-maker or the judge, which settles ex parkin advance all values, without common assent, without mutuality, placing price beyond the reach of negotiation or compact.- The fiat of the trust already enforcedthough never published, is a concise decree of two sections: The contract of sale, with all its incidents and particularly that of price, is hereby abolished. The executive committee will enforce this order by appropriate regulations. The liberty of buying is as much a part o( the rights of a freeman a3 that of speaking, writing, or publishing, or voting. If a trust political were organized to furnish ballots to voters under such circumstances rs to suppress all others, what remnant would be left of the electoral franchise? The commercial trust is an oligarchy, vholly irresponsible, usurping a power not granted, neither inherent nor delegated, to create and continue a mode of traffic without sale. Yet all things in the world of trade must at last come to the test of real valuation, a value ajrreed upon by two, not by one, of the parties in interest. Although trust commodities are exempt from the incidents of sale, yet the final issues of the scheme representing its plants, profits, properties, speculative gains, and dividendstrust certificates are not so exempt The val ue of these trust certificates depends upon the degree in which real sates may be extinguished. The liberty of buying, inherent in our people, this right itself is thus made merchandise of, is converted into assets to enrich those who would destroy it. These certificates tend inevitably at some time to the block and hammer bf an actual appraisement. They now float in all marts by millions as motes the people the Bunbeam, aqueous coupons and debentures doomed to dissolve in gaseous vapor in the hands of ultimate holders. The trust really sells its shares, though not its goods. For the shares it makes and seeks a market tolerates no other. The disposal of property by sale is a contrivance adopted by and in the interest of the many of the multitude of genuine bona fide venders and purchasers. Any other mode of gainful alienatiop must bo an invention of a less number in the interest of a very small minority. Commodities of every kind left" to the unimpeded action of the market will seek and find a rate of real value as water its level. A ny obstruction of the natural normal movement in either case ends in inundation and disaster. This the projectors of. the trust scheme well know while they Whisper, "After us the deluge.". That hazard and Iossea attend the system of the fair sales in - the open market may be granted. The exercise of the right to buy and sell, like the use of other social, civil and political rights, is not always free from abuses, but the liberty of the market, with all its attendant risks, is to lo preferred to the sating of that greed to which the trust panders, or to the gross servitude which it imposes. l t us stand by the rights of the people. Therein no wrong will be done to any, and we shall also lay fast hold of a means of enlargement and deliverance from this thraldrom. Congress, charged with the duty of commercial regulation in a certain sphere of traliic, should not fail in denouncing tho specious policy of false sytem which is founded upon the denial and suppression of tho first law of trade and the violation of the cardinal principles of justice. The modern trust, with criminative care and skill, consolidates the. three offenses of

forestalling, engrossing, and monopoly into one. These practices were long aso known and denounced as crimes bv both the Roman and English codes. In preparing to prevent, denounce, and condemn the same we follow the common judgment of mankind in ridding our markets of these noxious incumbrances. Trusts of this character are of quite late origin in the United States. Their existence has become well-known, and their extensive transactions distinctly felt since the so-called revision of the tariff in 18S.. Uy the high prohibitory rates under this revision many lines of" commodities and merchandise of foreign production were totally or almost wholly excluded from our ports, leaving a void or vacancy in the supply of these to be filled by similar wares and products furnished by home industry. Those who in good faith advocated the policy of prohibitory protection expected to see this void in supply filled by goods o tiered in the market at fair prices induced by free competition among our own people. There were many of us, indeed, who thought it strange that free competition should be stimulated by heavv and needless taxation, and who yet think that this condition wouid be much better induced by a levy of taxes as light as practicable. But the actual beneficiaries of high tariff rates had no opinion upon this subject. They never contemplated fair competition as the object of prohibitory protective legislation. They immediately began the formation of trusts to prevent it, and have continned, expanded, and enlarged these frauds until, as to many wares in the market no transaction can take place which is not tainted by the unclean hands of this dishonesty. The trusts attack and feed upon with like voracity either the fat or the scraps of the land ; they conspire to enhance the price of cotton ties, binding twine, steel rails or structural iron with equal indifference. Whether there was anyihing specially favorable to the formation of these fraudulent conspiracies in the terms of the revision of the tariff act of 1SS3, it may bo difficult to say. There was this much implied by its passage and inferred from its enforcement, that the policy of the government had become permanently protective and prohibitory, and it was upon this assurance that tho monopolists ot the trusts acted and depended in their subsequent operations. The republican party can not evade its responsibility for thetarid revision of 1SS:); the act as then revised is yet the law. It can not deny its responsibility for the high protective duties therein enacted, out of which have grown and from which have sprung the trusts. Whether high prohibitory rates of duty increase tho cost of goods to the consumer has been a question much debated; but it can not be a question at all that the trust does this. The very object of a trust is the frauduently enhanced price. The republican party, then, in the best of faith, refusing and declining to modify or reduce the tariff rates, may join in the work of legislating against trusts as abuses of their policy, in providing that their formation shall bo made a penal offense. It is true that a very late form of this mischief has taken such shape as to afiect articles not subject to the tariff, articles always made, held, furnished, and for sale in our own country. But these new forms of mischief are merely imitations of the original. This whole family of frauds was first bred and reared during the era and ascendency of what is called protection, in which, if there bo any good whatever, this good should not fail by reason of the evil deeds of tho offspring ot so kindly an alma mater. Congress would to-day instantly and definitely decline to fix a price upon any commodities; but there is a confederacy outside of the national legislature, yet fostered directly by its policy, which steps in between the buyer and seller in every hamkt, village, and city of the Unite! States, makes the bargain, and declares the price to be paid by the purchaser. We are not without the power in our own sphere to deal somewhat summarily with both, with all classes of trusts, to crush out and destroy this whole confraternity of pillage. The bill of the senator from Ohio (Mr. Sherman) and that of the se nator from Mississippi (Mr. George) providing for the suppression of trusts ought to meet with general favor. It is proposed to make the organization of these combinations a penal offense, and to punish those engaged therein. Such a law ought to include ail those who in any manner aid or abet such organizations, whether they be accessories before or after the fact. While I would not hold as amenable to such penalties a shipper or forwarder who, without knowledge, received and carried trust commodities, yet one of this class who knowingly did so, thus intentionally lending aid to the consummation of the criminal purpose, ought to be charged, tried, convicted and punished as a confederate. Very few of these conspiracies are concerned in operations designed to effect tho trade of a single state, or lesser division of the country. The easy and abundant means of transportation between the different states is what makes tho offense profitable, and transportation of trust goods, with a knowledge of their destined use and character, should be deemed and declared to be an act as illicit as the principal offense. Congress need not stop a mere denunciation of the crime. We have the means and power to prevent its execution or render tho same unavailing. The prevention of the crime denounced is not an unwarranted or extraordinary use of legislative authority. Wherefore amendments or supplementary provisions to the bills making the trust jenal should receive our hearty concurrence. We may lawfully enact that upon it being certified by the officers of customs or otherwise made known to the president that a trust conspiracy exists in any class of commodities subject to duties as imports that officer shall by proclamation declare the fact, and suspend the collection of duties therein until and for such time as he shall be satisfied that the trust has centred to exist, or for such definite period as congress may in its discretion prescribe. This is not legislation by the president; it is action by the chief executive under a law of the land. That the president may be thus rightfully vested with power to ascertain and declare the existence of a trust as a fact, and a consequent suspension of duties uoon trust commodities, is as clear and plain as that he may be authorized to proclaim the opening and establishment of a new light-house or port of entry, the admission of a new state, or a certain district of unsold lands in the West as subject to entry and purchase. There is little or no langer of the abuse of such power; there will indeed be very seldom occasion for its exercise. The fact that the president is empowered to declare the existence of a trust and to order a suspension of duties will verv largely deter men from contemplated violation of the law. The promoters of such illegal combinations will rind it very di'ticult to procure confederates who must invest in a scheme foredoomed to certain frustration. As for the suspension of duties authorized by such legislation, it is simply placing for a restricted period certain articles on the free list, and as this free list in some form has boeöme a part of tho permanent law of the land, its temporary or occasional extension would bo the exercise, of a lesser power implied by and included in the greater. As before said, trusts now sometimes attach exclusively to domestic commodities or to those not effected by tariff rates, or to those partially effected, such as the dressed beef, sugar and coffeo trusts, some

of which would not be effected by the suspension of dnties upon imports, because, the articles which they deal in are either not imported or are imported duty free. . Now, as to these domestics, and, indeed, as to all trusts, we may aud should resort to another species of preventive and remedial process m aid of the proposed penal enactment. The congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states and w ith the Indian tribes. (Sec. 8, clause 3, art. 1, Constitution United Kates.) This grant of power is, by the terms of the text, confined to commerce of three kinds with foreign nations, with the Indian tribes, and among tho several slates. The power is not general; these particular kinds of commerce are mentioned and p'aced expressly under congressional regulation in the same section, sentence, and clause in the same breath, as it were, of the makers of the organic law. The regulations made under this clause may, as to the three varieties of commerce named, be the same, similar or wholly different; but the power granted in each of the three cases is one, sole, 6ingle; identical in degree and character; and this power of regulation is plenary without limitation, except as it is controlled by rights of person or property otherwise guaranteed in the constitution, or by those reserved to the states or people. As robbers tho mountains, as pirates the sea, so the lawless banditti of the trust infest the lines and purlieus of that kind of traffic designated as "commerce among the several states." They even imperiously assume to make their own regulations therein ; to deny the right of congress to interfere with their usurped dominion, claiming that their combinations are private affairs, with which neither the president nor congress has any concern. Yet many of the crimes against society are marked by this distinction of privacy. Nevertheless, this great common wealth of traffic, briefly described in modern phrase as interstate commerce, is the peculiar sphere and lieid, a republic within a republic, segregated, set apart, held in suspension, as it were, as subject to the special supervisory regulation of congress. It embraces in its." jurisdiction all the persons, all the things, all the means and instrumentalities engaged or employed in commerce among the several states in the same manner and to the same extent as those used or concerned in commerce with foreign nations or with the Indian tribes. This is a high national police power, and congress within the scope of it has the same right to deal with the actors in and subjects of interstate commerce, in the interest of honest trade and public policy, as a state may have over traffic within its own limits. A state in the passage of a statute against these trusts would be merely re-enarting the common law, and would be as plainly within the line of its legitimate authority as in punishing a conspiracy to forge negotiable securities, or to secure goods by fals- pretenses. A penal law against trusts does not interfere with the sale of property or prohibit the alienation thereof. It prevents a conspiracy to sell or dispose of property at a false price, at a fictitious, unreal and fraudulent valuation; and this is surely a matter of as rightful police

regulation as the prevention of larceny. It may be said no man i compelled to buy trust goods at trust prices; he can take them or not, as he wishes; but neither is any man forced to take counterfeit money, nor to part with his propertv upon the strength of false tokens or of false promises anil fraudulent representations, yet the guilty actors in this class of ollenses have always been deemed and punished .-is criminals, notwithstanding their victims suffered not by compulsion. There is no doubt that the methods of regulation adopted by us in the provinces of Indian, foreign anil interstate commerco are mutually interchangeable by legislative enactment, in our discretion. The power is neither more nor less in one of these provinces than another. Congress has made the importation of dutiable goods, without the payment of duty a penal offense. The regulation for the punishment of those guilty thereof is as old as the government. But legislation has not stopped here. The goods themselves, made use of to defraud the revenue are, by the Prune regulation, liable to seizure, forfeiture, and sale. The sale of certain commodies to the Indian triles is interdicted, and thosv? engaged in sach sales are denounced and punished; but it is a part of the same regulation that the goods used or designed for use in such illegal traffic shall be liable to seizure and tho like condemnation. The goods and wares of a trust, placed in transit or in store, designed to carry out the objects and purposes of such conspiracy, are contraband of good faith, of common honesty, of all honorable and fair dealing, and should also be subject in like manner to seizure, forfeiture and sale. They are no more entitled to protection, exemption or favor than the goods of the smuggler or Indian contrabandist. In making a regulation of commerce among the several states, which shall denounce the trust as a penal offense, we ought to add to it a provision that on information filed by the proper district attorney, upon affidavit of any collector of internal revenue or of the customs, or any private citizen, the goods, wares and merchandise of any trust combination may be seized, and ascertained, upon due process and trial, to bo such, shall be forfeited, confiscated and sohl, the proceeds to go to the public treasury, except what may be necessary to pay tho cots of the prosecution and a substantial reward to tho informer. It may be said that 6uch a policy will fill the country with spies und informers it will empty it of trusts. The remedy may be considered harsh the wrong is not a mild one. It is the gigantic commercial sin of this age and generation. I do not wish to palliate the offense of smuggling, of false invoicing, of fraudulent undervaluation, or of illicit trade with Indians; but what are these compared to the iniquity of a Kystom which honeycombs the whole world of domestic commerce with fraud, with falsehood, with suspicion, distrust and impurity? There is nothing in the proposed legislation against trusts which encroaches upon or infringes the just rights of perrons or property. The trust is a nuisance, open and notorious, but cannot itself be taken destroyed or abated as other unlawful injuries to the public. It is an enormous obstruction to interstate trade and commerce, more dangrous than any of those whose removal has ever been contemplated by the acts for the improvement of rivers, harbors or highways; but it cannot be reached, apprehended or dealt with like these. The essence of the trust is the guilty intention of the conspirators. This intention is invisible, intangible, not the subject of phvsieal apprehension or discernment Wherefore, in this class of cases, the most ancient usage of the law-maker is to attach ßnd seize upon the things made use of in the perpetration ol the crime. The faiilt in such cases, without quitting the offender, is transferred, extended to the means and implements he uses. These aro deemed by their uso to be forfeit, as lawful deodanda to the government whose law has been violated. Also it sometimes occurs that the owner of smuggled goods or merchandise otherwise contraband of law cannot be known, or if known, can not be apprehended, yet the things themselves can be known, designated, identified as designed for an illicit purpose, wherefore the rights or proprietorship of the owner, known or un

known, are justly deemed to be lost and abandoned. It is not probable that these seizures of trust goods would be frequent or that the number of informers would be very great. A few convictions and sales under such an act would suffice to break the spine of this monopoly. The risk and hazard of the .adventure would be such as to soon banish these combinations from our trade and to work their perpetual final dissolution. The conspirators of the trust these scoffing assassins of our commercial lil-er-ties are now in the fnll and undisturbed enjoyment of successful operation. They are hunting prey, dividing the spoil in every market. They are making use of the courts and the laws of the country to enforce their contracts, to uphold their credit, and to clothe and to cloak their designs with efficiency and validity. Is the law, then, to be used as a shield to shelter and defend these baneful forces, and is there no weapon in the arsenal of legislative stores to grapple with and throttle these depredators ujou our commerce and spoliators of public faith and credit? It is not to be conceived but that the framcrs or founders of our form of government did foresee the vast and profluent current of trade among the several states did clearly perceive the evils which might threaten it the evils which itself might induce upon the body-politic. They have not left us without a way of escape or without the means of remedy. The trusts are stronc, based upon the principle of voluntary association lor an unlawful purpose, backed by millions of treasure, directed by sagacity and ability of the highest character; but there is an organization still stronger. It is the nation, the people of the United .States; their representative in the government, their authority that of law, and armed with this we mav assail and overthrow these enemies, if injustice and the most flagrant wrong have shaped, formed and organized themselves to pirate upon the earnings of the people, justice may bare and use, not in vain, its sword, to strike down the offense and the offenders.

HOW PROTECTION WORKS. force the Tariff Iksiic, i: lucnt the Tcople and Auticip te Victory. To the Editor ,S7r: When Richard Cobden began to make war on the protective tariff system in England, a little over fifty years ago, he had more than fifty times the difficulties to overcome that confronted Mr. Cleveland when he began a like war in this country in lSSs. There is no novel more interesting than the history of that war. In one year the Melbourne ministry found itself on the defensive. In three vears it had been deposed, and Sir IJobert Peel, a supposed stanch protectionist and the successor of Lord Melbourne as premier, had become a free-trader, and Cobden, supported by several able colleagues, had come into parliament, where all were protectionists when lie began the war. Ami thence on, the walls of protec tion rapidly crumbled, until the system of protection was a thing of the past. The merit and the wonder of the work done by Cobden, Bright and their colleagues, was in the thorough and complete education of the people. They were "converted and convinced;" complete "irredeemable converts" to the doctrine of free-trade, and this was the reason why Eords Derby and Disraeli were unable to restore the protective system in when they did their best to that end. With the advantages in favor of the tariff reformers in this country now, they ounht to be able to sweep the whole country clear of all formidable opposition to that reform in the next election ; and thev can do so with less than half the work bestowed bv Cobden and his allies in lS:;'.-40, if they will but work on the same lines. At the risk of considerable space 1 will Cite some facts from a recent and able review of their work by one who was familiar with it, in the hope that it mav lead to a more energetic and thorough effort among our own tariff reformers, who have started off on similar lines, but far less ably arraneed and followed out. The same "hue and cry" was raised by protectionists then that our protectionists raise now. "You w ill overturn the monarchy as soon as you will bring about the repeal of the corn law," said a whig peer; and Lord Melbourne said in the house of lords, that "I have heard of many mad things, but, before God, this project to repeal the corn laws is the maddest of them ail." With a lull knowledge of the ignorance of the masses and the difficulty ol educating. them to a true understanding of the questions, Cobden initiated and persevered in the labor. Eirst, there were small leagues. Then a general league as soon as enough converts were made. Then a fraternization with the sensible portion of the mercantile middle classes, and an appeal to their money bags. A moral and religious spirit was infused into it on the ample evidences of the injustice done by such a system of taxation. They roused opiosition, knowing their opponents would read what they said, and the indifferent would become interested to know what it was all about. They wrote to the newspapers; they bought permanent space in many journals; they invit-d correspondence; they started a paper of their own ; they issued and circulated tracts by the hundreds of thousands; they engaged lecturers and journeyed from place to place, speaking and explaining to all who would listen. Petitions were started and solicitors for names wero sent out everywhere, asking parliament to repeal the corn laws. Hazars and tea parties were held, and ladies took an enthusiastic part. There was constant pressing and repetition of facts until understood. The protectionists continued their shouts of alarm, 'Sir James tiraham of the ministry, in reply to a large body of delegates who waited on him to urge repeal, replied, among other things, that "if the corn laws were repealed, the land would go out of cultivation, church and state could not be upheld, all institutions would be reduced to their primitive element, and the people the reformers were exciting would pull down their houses about their ears." But the quiet, educational work continued to tell, and to-day England controls the trade of the world. For a moment, contrast her condition with our. .She, with her great manufactures, free food products and free raw material for manufactures, and we, with our robber tariff on every necessary of life, and in extent far beyond our wants, for either revenue or, protection. Take one illustration of the infamy of legislation by the republican administrations, as (shown by results that relating to ships and navigation. Along our coasts were many ship yards ami we had from 60 to SO per cent, of the carrying trade on the ocean. Thus giving a market to millions' worth of ship building material and many thousands of men found profitable employment. American decks were covered with American seamen, and every one was a school, educating men to "fill the ships of war when needed for naval duty. Millions of dollars were poured into the purses of American shippers for transportation, and no nation on earth had the power to take from us this supremacy on the high seas. But a republican congress found and exercised the power to do it. On the pretense of protecting and encouraging manufactures against foreign competition, they enacted the protective tariif laws. They so increased the cost of all material entering into the building and equipment of ships, that a vessel here would cost from 40 to 50 E er cent more to build than it would to uild one in England or Scotland, where

no unjust burdens were laid on material. The result was that those who wanted a ship of any kind would not build it here when they could go to the Clyde and buv one for one-third to one-ha f less than it would cost to build it. Hence, the shin yards closed, one by one until ship building virtual. y ceased. This result was sought to be counteracted by more legislation of the robber order; and the republican administration made it the law that no vessel built abroad should be permitted to sail under the American flag. If I bought my ship abroad for $100,000, because it would cost me $150,000 to build one here, under the robber tariff on materials, I could not sail it aa an American citizen. I must hunt some other country to find a flag and look to for protection to my person and property on the seas. I would be disfranchised. Yet I would be taxed and held for military duty as if I were a citizen. The law said to me, "Buy your ship at home, and pay tribute to home manufacturers: or else clear out and go to the Turk, or Englishman, or some one else, if you want to be protected on the sea." The result was that American ships disappeared from the ocean, and American sailors found homes on foreign decks. We have less than 14 per cent, of the carrying trade, and England has over 00 per cent. The millions that came to our own carriers when republican rule came in now go to foreigners. Nice laws, these for a free and intelligent people? Let us look at an illustration or two: The most of the few shipments we make to South America, and nearly all we bring from there, go first to England and then cross back. We have to get our news from there largely by way of England. Take the harbor of "Hong Kong in China in 18?$. During the year there entered fifty-seven American vessels, with capacity of 87,td0 tons, and employing as crews 2.S13 persons; and there entered during the same time 2,57: British vessels, with capacity bf 3,'J-5,0ü'J tons, and employing as crews 1-0,159 persons. Vessels clearing from that port were: American, 6ixty-two; tonage, 91,321; crews, V-00 persons. British, ,54$; tonnage, 3,l!i9,,J74 ; crews, 119,010. Again, take Cane Colony in South Africa. The vessels entering all the harbors were: Foreign steamers, three; British, 309; foreign sail vessels from all countries, 21S; British, 172; of vessels navigating between Cape Town and the United States there were forty-six, all told, and of these only three were American. A similar condition exists generally. This is the way protection works everywhere, only it cannot be seen so plainly elsewhere as on the seas. But even "protection" has its limits, and in time will destroy the protected, as it has the ship-building and carrying trade for this country and is now howling over the woolen manufacturers. The vicious character of tariff legislation, as disclosed in this brief reference to our navigation laws, attends the protective system throughout; and it seems impossible that a people worthy of free government will tolerate it when they come to understand it. To give them that understanding should be the energetic work of democratic statesmen, writers, speakers and tariff reformers everywhere, and at all times, as Cobden, Bright and their colleatrues enlightened the people of Great Britain. This done, our "robber tarifl " laws will be a thing of the past. C. II. Reeve. Plymouth, Dec. 9. HARRISON AND HIS WARWICK.

Why Smiley Chambers Will Not Allow Dudley to be "Wo-rieil." St. Louis Republic Mr. Harrison's district attorney in Indianapolis says; "I shall not, by my aid, permit Col. Dudley tobe worried." Of course not. Mr. Harrison can not afford to worry Dudley or to allow the evidence baek of the blocks-of-live li tter to ge t into court. It would not be in accordance with his "judicial policv." This is very well understood, and when the Indianapolis district attorney, Mr. Chambers, gives it as his reason for allowing Dudlev to escape from Indianapolis that the information acainst him was filed with the IT. S. commissioner instead of with the district attorney, the country is not likely to airree with him that this constitutes sin evidence of "bad faith." It was merely an anticipation of his own bad faith in the execution of the laws against bribery and fraud. Mr. Chambers' attempt to retain some vestige of appearance of self-respect in acting for the president in this matter is as natural as it is painful, but in face of the well-known facts it is inevitably a failure. If he allowed the Dudley case to get into open court the president would at once dismiss him, and he would lose the salary which he now draws, because he is relied onto shield Col. Dudley, and Mr. Harrison, as Col. Dudley's beneficiary. The plan on which Mr. Harrison secured a majority in the electoral college was thus stated by Col. Dudley in his directions to subordinates: "Divide the floaters into block cf five, and put a trusted man with necessary funds in charge of these five, and make him responsible that none get away and that all vote our ticket We will fight for a fair election here if necessary. There will be no doubt of your receiving the necessary assistance through the national, state and county committees only see that it is husbanded and made to produce results." After reading this no one needs to be told why Mr. Harrison cannot afford to "worry Col. Dudley." He may show himpelf ungrateful and refuse to acknowledge the extent of his obligations to this conspiracy, which, in committing fraud, threatened violence, if fraud failed, but he knows well enough that it would be his own ruin to allow the courts to worry his Warwick. THE ORIGINAt ABOtlTIONIST. Substance of n. Controversy Hetwern the I.fie Oliver Johnson and George Jul nn. The death of the Hon. Oliver Johnson, one of the original Garrisonian abolition ists, has been noticed by the papers. In speaking of the matter, George . Julian, who was also one of the pioneer abolition- ' ists, said yesterday : "Johnson was one of the twelve men, fometimes called the twelve apostles, of whom Garrison was the chief. His death recalls acontroversy between him and my- I eelf a lew years ago on the genesis Of modern abolition. I endeavored to show, contrary to the generally re- ; ceived opinion, that Oarnson was not the original abolitionist of this country, but that that honor belonged to a native of Tennessee and a prominent minister in the society of friends, who started an abo lition paper in Mt. Pleasant, O., as early ; as 1817 and of course long years before Garrison was heard of. It was in the printing office of Osborn that Benjamin Lundy was employed and ' lina.ly became Osborn s assistant editor, and "in 1S21 the editor of a paper of his own, called the Grniutof Unictrma Kmancipation. Mr. Johnson also thowed that Osborn preceded Garrison and Lundv, al though the current histories of the time i State the case otherwise. Mr. Johnson re-, plied to my argument indignantly, and ; I wrote a rejoinder w hich enued the controversy. This occurred in the International Review in 18S2, and attracted much attention at the time. Mr. Johnsou was a journalist of large experience, and was & eupporter of Greeley in 1S72, but has since been a thoroughly partisan republican. Like many other Greeley voters in that vear, he seemed to have been frightened by his spasm of independence and hastily retreated to the comfortable slumbers of the . o. p."

DUDLEY, WOODS', CHAMBERS

WHAT THE PRESS SAYS OF THEM. Mr. Pynum to I)mntil an InTeM'gittoa Into tho Sonnl lou Conduit of ihr I', f. District Attorney Indignant I orumeiita of Le 1i"K .Nwi;i!f r. Washini;tfn fpec-ial. It it believid that f ir. Bynutu of Indiana will embrace the earliist opportunity to propose a comniitee of iveitiatioo. to look into the "hlocki-offire" lef er.and the conduct of the U. S. dittriet atorner at Indianapolis in protectin Dudlejfrofl arrest during his recent viiit to that toa The relations heuten th admiaitrationüd Dudley are peculiar. Harrison and Parter Miller bre taken extreme paint to gnub )udley publicly leveral titne 6ince the 4th o March last. At the tame time it is notorious hat Dudley has served notice on Harrison tat if he (.the president) countenances any pvoecution of hiiu ( Dudh-y ) by the federal auiuritie ia connection, with the famous "blocs-of-five" letter, that he (Dinilty) will tell all tat he knew about Harrison's knowledge o it, and the connection of the reEublican maaters therewith. Ibese thn-ats ave led to n armed truce. Harrison hus no love for Ducy and I'udlvy despi-es Harrison. Neither of tem, however, cau aliord to crush the other. Judge Wods of Indianapolis, who is an old chum of Iirri?on, and really a very abject republican pol, 6tarids in whh Dudley, and, with eugcetions from the administration, there is no uut that Dudley can remain in Indiana as 1 ng as he dehires, and thst uuless he is araenaile to 6tate laws he hl not Le arrested. Dudley'gfriends in Washington 6nrer at the . sutrcestion that he might be arretted in Indiana and exposed to trouble. They declare that Harriin dare not permit any such proceeding; tht Ju1ge Woods would not tolerate any pr-eeeinc, and that it would be a much as his ofKeia head was worth for the V. -s. attorney to prunt any proceeding that would embarrass o annoy Dudley, It can betaken for pranted. herefore. that Dudley will return to Washint;to when he feels disposed r.nd will continue to Vsit Indiana whtnever he fetls like iL - An Impulent Dcniil of Justice. Y. World. Apparently io ndruii itration has ordered that -Mr. VY. W. l udley te not arrested for bis lnfamou attempt to corrapt the voters of Indiana in behalf of Mr. Harrison. It is a notorious fact that h did write the "blocks-of. five" letter. He escaped indictment by the connivance of Federal Judge Wood?, who discovered that it wss not a crime to attempt to bribe voters. On the afh davit and complaint of Mr. John Lane, the f.'deral commissioner made out a warrant for Dudley's arrest in Indianapolis on Thursday. The warrant, however, has not bten served because V. i. Dist,Atty. Chambers has directed Commissioner Van Hura to keep it hi pocket. This is an impudent ana wicked denial of justice. It is worthier of the dark days of the Knclish star chanber than of these latter days, and of this freer country in whose courts of law all men, rich and poor, Inch and low, are supposed to Maud on an equal looting. Such conduct as that of which these republican judicial oIlicersRre guilty would have been an outrage before the constitution of the United States was dreamed of. It would have been an attack upui the medieval privileges of Lnsrlishcien. It is taid, anl it is probably true, that this tyranny is in obedience to orders from Washington. No wonder, then, that Pu-iley dares to show himst'f in Indianapolis, and that he and Judge Woods are jocular over the defeat of justice and tie triumph of a grave political crime. Chambers' I).jr-c'fiil Conduct. it. Lotii Rf-piiWicl A decent regard for the opinion of mankind will induce President Harrison to dismiss peremptorily and in disgrace Mr. Smiley N. Chambers, U. S. district atton.ey at lud an.tpol:s. It is Mr. Chamber' eliicial duty to prosecute alleped violators of law against whom complaint are niade in a legal and proper manner. He not only refused to tllo'.r the ruacbinery of the biw to be set in motion against li'ocks-of-Five Dudley, but published an interview in which he declared that in his opinion Dudley's letters ulvising bribery and explaining bow it nhould be carried out "are honorable, tld indicate simply a patriotic interest in the elections." It way le pfti l. however, that even niter tha f.asrant violation of his duty and defiance of public decency, Mr. Chainlers need have no apprehension of removal or rebuke. The Harnsot administration ' cursed with the fatality of it origin. Conscious of being the product of fraud, it dare not refusa to protect the perpet-ators of the fraud that created it. It prefers t face the contempt of the well-informed rather t'.ian to run the risk of an exposure that would undeceive the millions of its dupes, (onsiderir.g the kind of administration it is, Clambers Las deserved well of it. Officials tn I.io With Crime. Hoston l'st. It is understood that Co'. YV. W. Dudley, of "blocks of five" notoriety, twos his immunity from arrest in Indianapolis to the interference of the U. S. district altornej in forbidding the service of the warrant which directed the arrest to be made. It is enoueh to say that this action has placed the administration in a very awkward position. It is renumbered that the threats oi Col. Dudley as to lis power for revenue in case he was brought to trial a year asro were followed by the n versr.l of Ju tire Woods' charge to the grand jiry havini: hi case in hand, and his consequent escape troni indictment. Again the ollicia hivs interfered with the ordinary course of law to keep Lim out of the courts, where the truth wouid be brought to light. He now enttrs their precincts a an honored visitor, Jjde Woods leaving the bench to meet an 1 tree, him when he came into his court-room. Dudley's Tine Hereption. Chicago HeraUL Dudley has never denied the celebrated letter in which he wrote: "Divide the floaters into blocks-of-f.ve and put a trusted nir.n with necessary funds in ciiarce of these live, and make hia responsible that none eets away and that all vote our ticket." And m hy should be deny it? Together with "the necessary funds." raited by Quay and Wanamaker for bribery in the state of New York, it elected Hen Harrison and made th latter his fast friend and zealous protector. Screened by Harrison from the law, he has been in Indianapolis receiving the congratulations of republicans upon the incenuity of the biocks-of-6ve idea and the success with which it was worked. Deny it? Not Dudley. He is proud of it. A Rascal's Mfurty Welcome. rUilad lt bit 11 cord-l The news from Indi.mapoli is remarkable. It appears thüt in order th it Col. W. W. Dudley may revisit the scene of his exploits as conspirator apainst the purity of elections in Indiana the function oi the prosecutine oSicers of the courts have been laid aside temporarily. He has beeu protected by ullioial who should have broucht him to justice; and J mit Woods of the U. S. district court hus diraeei himself further by coniintr down oil the bench to welcome a racal upon whose head a reward had been fet. Ihis is the same judee who reemed himself In order to screen Col. Dudley from the punishment which the laws provide for bribery. Now For the White House. - (if. Y. Wor d. Cul. Dudley tells an Indianapolis reporter that since Mr. Harrison's metseace appeared a great many republicans have changed their views and that "the outlook now is favorable for the establishment of the most harmonious relations between president and congress." There is every reason to believe that Dudley will soon He warming his toes at the whitehouse grate. Ind anavolis Outraged. Tided Reo. Indianapolis is outraged by the swaperr f Col. Dudley dorine his siay in that city. That the "blocksol-five" statesman was s-ived from arrest ty direct instruct. ons from Washintt'D seems not to abash bint in the lesnt, but to make him the more triumphantly dctiauh The reigning characteristic of his class of republicans is unlimited assurance aud all. Might Take a R.tck Seat. Society. 1 The diplomatic corps was beiosr led to their seats when a tall, lank person tried to pass the usher. "Are you a minister?" he wss asked. "Yes a minister of 5od." ,:Ah! well, wait until 1 hare seated the min. ister of Portugal, and if I can get you a back teat I'll do bo."