Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1900-01-18

l.
the laws of the country and therefore
should be under the control of the
laws of the country. This does not
mean municipal ownership but it
means successful substitute for it.
Protective Tariff aud Trusts.
without speaking of it in parti-
san sense, we may be assured that
unless state and national legislation
will SO treat these monopolistic combi-
nations we will have to give up the
so-called American system of protec-
tive tariff. If the trust is to be recog-
nized by this country then the system
of protective tariff must be abolished.
The people have their choice. / am
one who believes in the system of a
fair, just and reasonable protective
tariff with reciprocity, and that it can
do much for this great country; that
it can and should be saved for our
nation. This cannot be unless the
proper rigid legislation is made to put
an end to trust growth.
what Shall the Law Bee
On this important part of the
trust question and trust regulation,
Capt. Hutchinson said the following:
VII lllS loll vi OClOUSl, 1879, luG
supreme court of Illinois rendered a
decision on the trust question, which
brushes out the existence of trust in
Illinois, and after calling attention to
the fact that corporations of another
state are permitted to do business in
the state of Illinois by the courtesy
and comfy existing between the states
the. court used the following strong
language, to-wit:
" Citizens of Illinois cannot evade the
laws of Illinois, passed against trusts
and combines, and defy the public pol
icy of the state by going into foreign
state and chartering corporation to
of its laws. When these foreign cor
business, they must conform to the
Briefly, this was case brought by
Glucose Co., which had been absorbed
MES, into one great corporation, known
Glucose Sugar Refining Co. carries on
in the great corn belt of these United
olulOSS anu has AO luOl " w W CI
business in the state Of New Jersey,
where it incorporated, than we have
here as citizen of Ottumwa, Iowa, and
yet it did incorporate there for the
purpose of evading the Illinois law on
trusts. The ruling Of the supreme
court in Illinois in this case is sweeps
| ing, and have no doubt but that other
states will make equally.ias sweeping
decisions where they have 8. trust law,
should the matter ever come before
Them. Tie supreme court Of Indiana
has already done so on the ground
that twb corporations Combining to
lmonopolize, forfeit their charters; that
they SO forfeit because such an act
| brings them in conflict With the com
| mon law.
cit is laid down in the constitution
of Iowa that corporations shall be or
ganized under the general laws which
shall be provided on that subject, by
the legislature. This is the principle
which is recognized by the constitu-
ton of every state in the Union. There
| is not state in the American Union
which cannot, if disposed to do so, con
stitutionally provide that every cor
| poration, existing now or hereafter
organized, shall not combine, or dis
solve to combine, with any other cor
poration for the purpose of carrying
on monopoly, and so on, to control
products and exclude competition. For
doing so the legislature can constitu-
| tionally provide that such an act shall
work a dissolution of the corporate
rights and franchises, and further, that
| the officers and directors shall suffer
fines and penalties. sifj9tas
"That there will be much Legislation
on this line by the legislatures of these
United States within the. ensuing two
years, there is little doubt. i do not
know that it is material that the. laws
of each state, on the control or sup
| preston of trusts, must he uniform
provided the law is made as it should
ne under the constitution ofeach state
| If that should be done, there will be
an end to the so-called monopolizing
4 trust in this country in a reasonable
/ time.
Anyone who will intelligently read
1 the recent decision referred to, from
/ the supreme court of Illinois, win rec.
ognize that if all the states will pro.
vide such a law as Illinois has, with OF
without congressional legislation, OF
with or without national conssitu.
! tional amendment, monopolistic com,
binations will be prevented, yet it is
the duty of congress tos enact law
and if necessary, to amend the consti
tuition Of the United States to cooper,
(. ate with the respective states in con.
trolling the; trust question. To say
that congress cannot devise plan is
foolish. The general principle in thi.
country is that the trust corporation
is illegal and void; and whatever elss
congress may do, every intelligent mar
knows that it, can legislateT so as te
i effectually control9the trust power, 81
far as interstate commerce is con
cerned. Congress can, and should
come up to this question, and should
stay with it until the problem is set
tied, so far as national legislation shall
be concerned, and this Legislation
should not be equivocal, by patch
work or weak. 1t should be strong
and with ample fines and penalties at
tached, and provision for carrying gu
the enforcement of the law
Alaskan Land Laws.
II Washington, Jan. 15.-Governo
Brady, of Alaska, and delegation from