Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1899-10-05
;OUTSIDE POINT OF VIEW.

Written for the Times Republican.


Written for the Times Republican.
The big town meeting" recently held
in Chicago to discuss the trust ques-
ton brought out as many opinions as
there We're speakers. That good will
come from such a discussion is general
ly admitted, and, entirety ignoring the
politics of the speakers, 1t would seem
many can agree on some of the state
ments made. For instance, II. w. Sey-
mour, editor of the Chicago Chronicle,
said: The trusts or combina tions
which should be destroyed and which
can be destroyed are those which exist
by reason of the, protective tariff. or
which could not exist by reason of the
protective tariff, and those which either
in their organization have adopted
criminal practices and are therefore
amenable to the criminal laws. In the
one case there is need of the repeal of
unwise and unjust legislation. IN the
other there is need of the enforcement
of penalties hiding behind trust organ
izations as we'll as they do against in
dividuals who stand upon their own res
sponsibility." Perhaps to Republican
readers The trusts that should be de-
stroyed gives list too sweeping, but in
general the argument is good.
Although now of New York, it is only
a few years ago he was of Iowa, and if
any sensible remarks We're made on
that occasion it was by DR.. Albert
Shaw, of New York: What do 1 think
of trusts? What do think of the heav-
emily system? think that they are both
inevitable. What we have to do is to
correct airy defects there may be in
such trusts. i want to see them prop
e1'ly handled and operated. When they
are controlled in that manner there is
no need to fear any evil results. In 9TH
err words, we want to take out the good
there is in trusts and do away with the
bad features"
Here is some good talk from Prof
John Graham Brooks, Cambridge
Mass.
II believe it to be the beginning of
practical sense to understand that the
new combinations can in no sense be
permanently smashed. The party which
proposes to do this, in the sense of abb
solutely checking them, will have plen-
~ of leisure to regret it. If the combi-
nations are to work for the public as
we'll as for private good, three things.
TWO of then now largely under the vot-
eis' control, must be brought about:
Il. AS absolute publicity of methods
and account as the largest Massachus-
etts corporation has to submit to.
- Every artificial advantage given
by the tariff must be removed.
%. Railroad discrimination shall not
be allowed to these combinations.
1T is said of the trusts that they Will
raise havoc with our politics.. 1t APP
pears to me Very unlikely that men of
first ability will so far fail in tact as to
disregard and afYront an alarmed. sus-
picious and powerful public opinion,
Nor have | the slightest question tina,
If it becomes plain TO the people that
the combinations manipulate politics
Ia their own private ends. and persist
IN this. they viii have themselves
| 10 thank for driving the country fur
| ther and faster INTO socialism than any
and all forces that have ever shown
themselves in our public life
Recently a corporation desiring TO do
/ business in Kansas and TO avoid an.
| tagonistic legislation, changed theil
| business TO one of partnership.
r. b. Thurber. a lawyer from New
! York, mentions that 1T is overlooked
| that corporations are really co-opera,
/ tons. that the number of partners a.
] stockholders in any industry is in
/ creased, that any one can become
/ partner, and that instead of being con
1 centrators of wealth. they are distrib
/ utprs Of wealth. 1t has been assumed
that labor would be oppressed by tn,
organization Of capital, but experienc,
| has shown that organized labor hal
/ met organized capital. and that tn,
| largest organizations of capital hav'
furnished the steadiest employment
and have paid larger wages than indl
4 ridual employers. The grievances o
individuals injured in this evolution o
Industries have been magnitied and tn
] general good minimiZed.
by general consent it is assumed tn
speeches which attracted the most at
tention We're those of Bourke Cockra
and William j. Bryan. Here is an ex
tract from the remarks of the former
g 1t must he borne In mind that tn
gentlemen who object to this form o
domination or monopoly on the groun
that il destroys competition, are who'll
Illogical. Ut does not destroy competi
ton. 1t is the very product of compe
tition You can not have competition
without competitors. and If you hav
!. competitors, one must prevail. II yo
do not allow the man who prevails i
the competition the full fruit of.inis vic
tory, he Will not compete, and nobod
else will, and then you have no compe
tition.
IF you have competition. you wi
have excellence. Is not every form c
competition certain to produce excel
lence wherever it occurs? l heard a sc
cialisr this morning declare that com
petition was warfare. Let me protes
To that. Competition is not warfare !
: the sense of being destructive. Compe
. tition is the ascertainment Of the plac
of greatest utility for each individual.
:, William j. Bryan said:
Monopoly in private hands is indt
feasible from any standpoint and into
cradle. 1 do not divide monopole
, There can be no good monopoly in pr
vate hands until the Almighty sends I
angels to preside over US. There may t
one despot who is better than anotht
e despot, but there is no good despotisr
r When a branch of industry Is entlrel
e in the hands of one great monopoly, {