The Saint Paul globe., 1899-07-31
THE LATEST TRUST REMEnx

Inc IaleSI proposal for the effectuaI
control Of the trusts has occasioned a
good deal of comment It is to adopt
an amendment to the constitution. placing
the trusts under federal jurisdiction.
1t is claimed by those who urge this
method of action that it would effective
ly take the trusts out of politics; that an
amendment of that character would be
readily adopted by congress and fndorsed
by the people of the several states, and
that the trust enormity would thereupon
cease to modest and make us afraid. 1t
is to be feared that the plan has originat-
ed more in a desire to take the subject
out of politics than to solve the grave
problem in a manner that would be pro-
tective of the rights of the people At
torney General Griggs has declared that
the federal government can do very lit
tie, if anything, to destroy the trusts.
inasmuch as the subject is one with which
the states necessarily have to do. A
good deal of criticism of Attorney Cen
er1l Griggs has been induIged in on
account of that opinion; but he is none
the less correct in his view. Except in
the domain of interstate commerce con-
gress can have no concern with the
trusts. And, so far as the federal iudi-
ciary is concerned, it can hardly be de-
clared that that department has so com
mended itself to the popular approval as
to suggest it as the medium by which
to destroy the evil of the trusts. Only in
the few classes of controversies specified
in the federal statutes could the sub
ject be brought before the United States
courts. There are few who sincerely de-
sire to see the trusts destroyed that would
willingly transfer exclusive judicial con-
troll over them to those tribunals.
There is a great variety of reasons why
this proposal to amend the United States
constitution, taking all Jurisdiction on
the subject Of trusts away from the sew
eral states and placing 1t exclusively in
the general government, should not be
adopted; and we doubt whether there is
an intelligent reason that can be ad-
vanced why it should be done, aside from
the desirability of taking the subject out
of politics.
The result of the discussion Of this sub
ject, so far as it has been carried on, has
been to teach the public to discriminate.
Not all trusts are illegal or Injurious.
You cannot prevent those who are en-
gagged in the same business from uniting
their resources in the conduct of a COM
mon business. The fact that a given
business is Of vast proportions does not
of itself constitute that business in any
sense legitimate subject Of hostile legis-
lation. Nor does the fact that it rep
resents a combination of a number. of
establishments in the particular line
which were acting in competition soma
time before.
The disposition toward concentration in
business is merely a social and economic
phenomenon. With the tendency. society
may or may not deal It may under
take to regulate it within certain weIl-de-
fined legal and economic lines; but to
proceed with reference to it on the theory
that it is inherently mischievous is sim
ply absurd.
The antitrust sentiment must level its
weapons against those business undertake
ings which, like the Standard Oil con-
Germ, have been able effectively to de-
stroy competition, and are successful in
preventing competition in the future.
This is the class of concern, and these
are the characteristics which are dan
gerous to the welfare of society. Until
public officials recognize this truth there