The evening herald. [volume] (Shenandoah, Pa.) 1891-1966, 1899-06-20
Origin of the Trusts.

The country at large is deeply in
debted to Mr.. Havemeyer for the in
formation, so clearly set forth in his
testimony before the Industrial Com
mission, that the tariff is the real
cause of all the trusts We have been
under the delusion that the hard
times in the country during the period
of Mr.. Cleveland's administration,
when the advocates of low tariff or
no tariff had full swing, was due to
the Wilson bill, which permitted the
manufacturers of other countries to
come into what we thought was a
ruinous competition with the indus
tries Of the United States.
1t seems, too, that we have been
also laboring under an hallucination
that since the overthrow of Cleveland
free trade and the adoption of pro
tective principles again, we were
once more on the road to prosperity,
but the testimony of Mr.. Havemeyer
proves that by return to protection
we hbNc DSch WOl ming utou against
the interests of the people of the
United States. The wheels of in
dustry which have been set in motion,
the factories and rolling mills which
have been running night and day, the
steady advance in wages which have
been made all over the country, and
the large volume of export business
which has been reported for the last
two years, or since the change from
the Wilson tariff or tariff for revenue
only bill, to the Dingley protective
bill, must have been all in the nature
of dream from which we have been
rudely aw wakened by the testimony of
Mr. Havemeyer, one of the Trust
kings
Mr.. Havemeyer is opposed to any
duty above 10 per cent. being LEVIED
on foreign goods, because anything
above that is responsible for trusts
1t is a shame, too, the way the poor
Sugar Trust is abused and kept down
by the government. They are only
allowed 30 per cent. duty, when they
ought to have at least per cent. If
they could have just few more per
cent. tackled on they could manage to
make an honest living and at the
same time keep anybody else in the
sugar business from making money.
There is nothing in the arguments
of Mr.. Havemeyer but the regular
stock arguments of the Democratic
party. Whenever there is an evil ex
listing in the country, and you cannot
account for it in any other way
blame it on the protective tariff
Trusts have existed in England fol
years; certainly the protection doc
trine does not hold sway there. The
Sugar Trust, which Mr.. Hayemeye
represents, has been in existence 70
a period probably as long as an.
other of the monopolies of the coun
try. 1t has gorged and fattened il
self under both the Wilson RevenuD
bill and the Dinglsy Protective bill
Mr.. Havemeyer is just the style Of {
man to stand up and argue for the re
peal of a law which promotes trusts
The present generation has expert
enced the workings Of the two kind
of tariffs; they have seen the MeKin
ley bill displaced by the Wilson bill
and they witnessed our industries be
come paralyzed under it. They.hav
seen the Wilson bill repealed and tn
Dingley bill become the law of tn
land, and they have seen such a re
vival of business, OF manufacture
and of exports as has exceeded any
thing in the history Of the country
1t will take more than the test
mony of a representative of tn
Sugar Trust 10 convince the peopl
that the protective tariff is respons
ble for the trusts.