Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1899-06-22
THURSDAY, JUNE %, 1899.
yAyEMEYER AND TRUSTS.


The Richmond Times, after defending
trusts for many months and arguing that
they we're not only legitimate, but beneh'
cial. at last announces that it is opposed to
pro-trust legislation, although it is equally
opposed to antitrust legislation. This po-
sition is taken by the fines to enable 1t 10
denounce the protective system OF the
Republican party.
The Times SEXES upon the declaration
Of Mr.. Henry 0. Havemeyer, recently
made before the Industrial Commission at
Washington, in response to a question bya
member of the Commission as to whether
the sugar refining industry was built upun-
der free trade or protection. The question
and answer were as follows;
Q.-By Mr.. Livingston-was the sugar
refining industry built up under free trade
or protection?
A.-Protection; enormous protection.
Taking this for text, the Times
branches off into a tremendous TRADE,
as follows
"There is the whole thing in the
nutshell. and the question to which
the people OF the United States must adj
dress themselves. We do not believe IN
so.called antitrust legislation, but we are
more opposed to pro-trust legislation. We
think it scarcely less than infamous that
any law should be enacted to enable the
trusts TO swell their profits at the expense
of the general public. 1t is robbery, out
rageous, objectionable robbery when the
taxing mower of the government is used
not for the purpose Of raising revenue, but
70, the purpose of enabling one class OF
citizens to profit at the expense of another
class of citizens. That is the thing that we
have always fought, that we always Will
fight. and which we would love to see the
democratic PARTY fight with its oid-time
fervor in the rext rational campaign The
ami trust plank in the platform OF 1892 is
worried to Cur liking. 1t declares that the
,aralY fosters the trusts, and declares that
ii is the duty of the Democratic party to
see 10 it that all such discriminating laws
are repealed"
Our esteemed contemporary loses sight
of the true meaning of both the question
and answer as give above. The question
is: "Was the sugar refining industry built
III under free trade or protection, ana
not. was the sugar trust built up under
free trade or protection. The answer to
the question was therefore responsive, and
true. Republicans will not deny that the
sugar refining industry in the United
States was built up under protection. The
purpose of the Republican party in adop-
ting a protective tariff was to build up our
industries, and the testimony of Have
never shows that purpose was accom-
plished for the sugar refining industry as
well as ali others.
The contention of the Times that the
Sugar Trust" has been created by protec-
ton is controvefted by the fact that the
most favorable legislation the "Sugar
Trust has ever enjoyed was that which
WIS given it by the Wilson-Gorman
t,riff law, which was free trade, Demo
cratic measure. The Times should re-
member that the "Sugar Trust" was bit
terly opposed to any change in the pro-
visions of the sugar schedule as laid down
by the Wilson law; and tried to secure the
same provisions in the Dingley law.
While discussing Mr.. Haveymer and his
testimony the Times says: "He said in
the beginning what 'The Times" has so
often said in discussing this question, that
trusts are not in business for the sake of
philanthropy, but for the sake of making
money" This being true, we must con-
clude that it was business and not philan-
throphy which made Mr. Haveymeyer
and the sugar Trust" prefer Demo
cratic free trade tariff to Republican
protective tariff.
In conclusion, we would ask the Times,
why do trusts and combinations exist to
greater extent in England than they do in
this country? England is free trads
country, and therefore protection can
have nothing to do with the creation and
success of trusts.
Our Democratic friends are trying to
dissatisfy the people by telling them that a
protective tariff creates and fosters trusts.
m, ,t to,.;t,Io t,,,ut fhnt hoe ovor hooY,