The Forrest City times., 1899-07-07
EAVEMEYER AND TRUSTS.
The Sugar Magnate Takes s"s ~ Protection = Every Trust
 Save Ills own.

II. O. Havemeyer's arrajgppent or the trusts and his condemnation of dis'
 criminating tariff laws will meet with
 cordial approval by the masses who
 have been plundered by both these | agencies and robbed in the name of | "enterprise" and law. But his view is | too circumscribed when he says: | .I repeat that all this agitation against | trusts is merely the business machinery | employed to take from the public what | the government in it's tariff laws says 1t | ,s nroper and suitable they should have. 1t is the government, through its tarin laws. which plunders the people, and the trusts, etc., are merely the machinery for | doing it.
 Some trusts, like the Stanard Oil and railroad combines, exist independent- lv of tariff laws, and their destruction calls for remedial legislation along other lines than the tariff. The inter-
 state commerce laws, if enforced, would afford partial but quite substantial re-
 lief. But the republican party is bound in chains of adamant to the wheels of plutocracy. and therefore the attorney general of the United States has been
 instructed by his superiors not to act ] to the financial loss of those corruptive,
 destructive aggregations of capital
 which dominated and caused the elec-
 ton of his political master. Very selfishly, but illogically, Mir.
 Havemeyer pleads for an increased tar if duty on refined sugar. He says: "The rate of protection on sugar is an eighth of a cent per pound. which Is about three and one-half per cent. ad valorem. The least 1t should have is eight per cent. The sugar refining industry of this country. no mat | ter what form it's organization, Is entitled to adequate protection, if any industry Is. There are at least 10000O people depend- ent on it."
 Yes, and there are over 75,000,000 peo-
 pie compelled by government robbery to swell the enormous profits of the sugar trust. One-eighth of a cent per
 pound seems to be trifling matter, but
 when it is considered that the output of the sugar trust is approximately 10,-
 00O,000 pounds daily, we find that the people are robbed by this same one-
 eighth of q cent per pound of over
 s12,0O0 every day in the year.
 I. is surprisingly refreshing to be informed that the trusts are under
 no obligation to the states which ere ated them, but, on the contrary, the states are the beneficiaries of the con- descending trusts!"
 After informing an anxious world that trusts are the logical results of discriminative laws, MT. Havemeyer gravely says:
 Tn these days there are two forms, and two only. of monopoly. One. that which results from patent and copyrights. It is uni versally recognized that this is in the in- terest, not against the interest of the pub- lie The other, that which comes from unfair tariff discrimination. Tariff for the purpose of eQualizing against for eign bounties does not need to ba justified
 Oh, no. Tariff that favors the sugar trust is beneficent, but all other kinds
 are robbery, according to MT. Have | meyer.
 Is it not about time that the people
 were done with expert" testimony by those who confess they are plunderers and robbers? II. o. Havemeyer stands before the world to-day self-convicted
 Of conducting legalized robbing and plundering machine-a trust His
 parting advice is for the farmers to or
 ganize trust for their own protection With his assertions that there are trusts and there are not trusts, MT. Havemeyer has shown how trusts blind
 those who conduct them and sweep
 them and theirs away. Let the people
 come by their own.-Ckicago Demo- crat.