The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1900-04-20
The Trusts.

democracy has done the heavy bowling has remained
the republicans act. The Sherman Antitrust
republican measure, it's provisions
proper annihilated There just
shrewd men in business there in congress- When
these found that the Sherman law the trusts
they found way which the law would reach. In
stead of trusts proper gigantic corporations formed
which while amounting the thing still within
the law and the constitution. We have the
lodging OF other laws; know who by every moral
right should be in the pententary to-day but who have been
shrewd enough keep within the
thus kept themselves outside of the prison bars.
Democracy seeing that the rewd corporation attorneys
had been able devise scheme dodge the Sherman
forthwith up its howl alleging that the republicans had
done nothing although it we'll knew that that law the
republicans had gone far the per-
nit This has been the situation for the pastiew years
Democracy coaking corporations evadg the law and
publcans seeking remedy The republicans Congress
have become thoroughly convinced that these large
menacing corporations not be successfully dealt with
unless the constitution to give Congress
added power.
Accordingly the republicans propose pass
luton providing for constitutional amendment
upon by the various legislatures and by two,
thirds of them it will become part OF the
congress then such will efectua provide
against the evils growing Of the great corporations We
leave with fair minded this sensible and
best method of solving the problem Is better
than rantng and scoldng and appeals prejudice The
trust problem is in partisan and the thing for
all good citizens dois that their legislators ray
proposed amendment Congress has already gone as far as
the constitution would permit IT, after giving it added
power under the constitutional amendments no suitable
action is taken, the REVIEW promises for all
the rascas OUT what party they
belong. This is fair proposition and which epub-
andd
prominent business said yesterday that he
had heard large discussion pro and con upon
the Valued Policy Act We can easily understand that
That act is the of proposition that any
public meeting, the any party would carry
unanimously, and afterward each experiences
its effects would want somebody kick him for having
voted for it, There is really pro side of the matter
Let us state the just by personal illustration
We took $4,000 policy upon house Iowa State
at Keokuk That by the established principles of in
surance which knew full we'll that other
IN that company mutually agreed with but that they would
pay the value of property up 900 as limit if
it destroyed by fire during time the policy is in
existence We to pay them say So per year. The
policy is for six Will anybody say that that property
will not deterorate in value in six years? is conven
lent for to have long policy it saves us the
trouble of renewals and the expense Of that
protection of the value our property whatever If is
for six years, pay in those years $54 What
small proportion that $54 is to the loss the polcyhoder
have agreed to If we lose the property by any
time in the six years would get back full actual value
OF it at the time of the loss up the limit of ooo
Whatever the amount paid would many times the
sum which we have paid for the protection Will any
IDLE person say that or should be based
the principle that the house up five wears and
the months hence that mutual must pay us
Whe at that fine hOuca
then $780, left to go decay, and we would make
81, 500 by burning it? Because must be borne in mind
that we have made mutual agreement with 20 900 other
policy holders in that company that we will bear our
share in paying them for their property it is DESTROYED
And if we had to join in paying 10000 other polcv
holders upon the loss of their property say double or
treble what 1T IS worth would be bankrupted would
be good others of the