New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-19
REGULATION BETTER THAN SUPPRESSION.

REGULATION BETTER THAN SUPPRESSION.
TO the Editor Of The Tribune.
sir: "Thc AnttCombIne Convention assembled g
the request Of the state OF Minnesota. has been in
session the present week. We moi Informed as to
the result Of It's deliberations. but far we csn
infer from tie deliberations already reported. any
act .on that II may take will be without due regard 10
either the nature and tendency Of tn" large industrial
combinations known trusts or the PRINCIPLES
that should guide H. ans attempt to correct whatever
evils may lie incident to the growth OF such combine
Il, lis.
In an article by the present writer, published Ia
the June social Economist" an attempt was made
To show that the growth OF these gigantic combinations
legitimate result OF industrial conditions that
have for time prevailed. and likely to con-
lime 10 prevail; that their general tendency Is for
the benefit. not the HARM OF the great masses OF tho
pc. pie. In that article 1t was said The only rom
.ennen,al drawback will b" the much exaggerated
CANCER Of cxtortiona,cly high prices being charged
by the mOnODo"s that Il Is assumed will exist i'le
practice Of sales at high prices to comparatively
limited class Of consumers will BE- at sOlutely incop.
sistent with the then existing modes OF production
BY OF expensive and colossal plants Such modes
OF production will absolutely require, as condition
OF success, l.e sales and small profits SILL II mny
be conceded that perhaps for time. until adjustment
has been had to the new conditions. there VIII 90
here and there Ovcrcharging by nonopolst pro.
be applied ly fixing ma ximum price BY means CT
governmental cOmms.ion.'
Here IS the gist OF the whole matter: Trusts shoulo
be dealt with, not by the method OF suppresson-the
nti-Comb!ne Conventions Committee on Resolutions
recommcn ds action looking 10 1.-THE complete exunc'
ton, Of trusts-but by tho method OF regulation.
In this way We shall all the invaluable benefits
likely 10 arise from Production on an enormous SCALE
with con ,equcnt diInnutiOn Of cost and shall DO
enabled 10 avoid any evils incident 10 such pro-
duction.
II is true that attempts 10 regulate b. statute the
maximum or minimum OF price, rs between buyer alo
seller have as n rule been generally condemned 40
not in harmony with The spirit OF modern industrasn'
Dut although absence of statutory restrictions upon
the freedom OF contract Is as rule, highly behencai'
yet there no absolute roncad principle iorbihahs
the imposition Of such restrictions In special claS
Of cases where the benefit arising from such res'r"
ton outwei:l,s the harm. To assert that there u
such an absolute ironclad principle Is TO III ih'"
The error Of the cldy aissez fare economists WHO
so persisteny opposed statutory restrictions upon 'ne
freedom of contract as between employer ard cmpioyc.
Rut Notwithstanding their opposition, statutes limiting
the number O, hours that .mploye-ior instance
roctorv operative-might be allowed 10 work. nave
now lorr been I'm successful operation: so successu
ms to convert some Of the most influential oppohe".
az such LEGISLATION. The cry of "paternaltm' ris1
whenever proposition l. made to Impose res''r"'o
u.hs,her between employer and emDloye. or oc1~eea
tuvcr and seller has small Justification Inc po"'
IA consider l. whether, considering all the CHS UNI
stances OF the particular case, such r. CIV" 10
uhelv To produce more bcrcht than harhi' OF '"'
reverse.
Assuming then. that statutes fixing the MAN.
mum nrice 10 be- charged by monopoli't PRODUCER
are or NAV be- abStmcty desirable. we next coh,'ueF
whether there ans practical difficult! III III" way
L., at serious prdettu ui'-
acu,tv All our anti trust statutes. whether STATE OK
Federal are under present conditions: Hs ns 20 ip
the rock OF the com ,, ou power 10
regulate commerce among the several sta,e.. nms
this leave; zach state Win power ,be Exclusion Of
c'nrress As the matter stands; no gwen statute, ,h
whanrr state or fera GS9 de had nde the Fed
ea The inquiry %ii ,S,e to 1ef Iroae 1
"" iIa Ti hcn shall we effectively deal with the prob:
lem Of fi>ins, whenever necessary tne ,rsns
price 10 charged by monopos CORPORATION Of
states, The answer will be- obvious 20 one N MnI
will consider in this connection the metnod oi S,.
Ing with the problems arising out OF The discose,y
the adeuacy Of state prohibiiG1 , lesST04 Com
Wilson Of isC making inoN'ns dpa @oFs and
Eject Of the laws Of such state Now; 10 nav Az.
state TO deal adequately win me prT w monopo.
lis; pr,ducHr Congress should. following the pattern
Of thr Wilson net, pass statute 'naDIihE e".n
10 nix after arrival In such state, the masimrm pr TIC
n any article OF necessary imported lhch u.is
states can take action accordingly. In nv view this
T. Tho most feasible method OF dealing with the
trust problem -, =, .,,or,,.
the view that the benefits likely TO result rom 'ss
gigantic Industrial combinations have Deeh hu.. ~.
drrra ted and the evils much exaggerated -. any
rate the true remedy, whenever anu "ne''e'
nee ded, Is regulation, not Suppression. :, coovr
FREDERICK IL. COOkE"
New-York June o, 1893.