Corvallis gazette. [volume] (Corvallis, Benton County, Or.) 1900-1909, 1902-12-16
THE ANIMUS OF IT.

ident's message accuses h Ill of
hesitancy, trimming and of being
vague and inconclusive. Speak
ing of his treatment cf trusts,
the N. Y. Evening Pest says:
"He does not specify a single
definite evil or name one precise
remedy" The president says:
~ believe that mouopolies, un-
just Determinations, which pre-
vent or cripple competition,
fraudulent ovcrcapitallzatlen,
aad other evils in trust organiza
tiens and practices which injuri-
olsly affect interstate trade can
be prevented und>r TIE lower of
congress 10 regulate commerce
with foreign nations and among
the several states"
Surely this utterance discovers
no hesitancy nor vsgueness.
DETERMINATIONS which prevent
or cripple cempetition-fraudu-
lent over-capitalization." Here
he specifies two evils and the
very ones most frequently attri-
buted to trusts. Already he has
sud: Corporations, and espec-
tally combinations of corporations
should be managed under public
regulation" Publicity should
be given to their affairs. ''Pub-
1icity can do no harm to the
honest corporation, and we need
not be over tender about sparing
the dishonest corporation" Hav-
ing in mind the objection-with
which so many members of con-
gress have endeavored to excuse
their supineness-that without a
constitutional amendment giving
such power congress is unable to
regulate corporations and trusts,
the president concludes thus: 81
earnestly recommend this SUBJ
ject to the consideration Of con-
gress, with a view to the passage
of a law reasonable in its provi-
siens and effective in its opera
tions, upon which the questions
can be finally adiudicated that
now raise doubts as to the neces-
sity of constitutional amend
ment." Here he specifically urges
congress to pass law for the
regulation of trusts which shall
be so reasonable in its provi-
sions and effective in its opera
tions'' that it shall fail only be-
cause the Supreme Court finds
congress has no constitutional
power to enact any law ia the
premises. This is quite definite
and specific enough, surely. But
the president does not falter even
though this might be the fate of
such a law, for he proceeds: eff
it prove impossible to accomplish
the purposes above set forth by
such law, then, assuredly, we
should not shrink from amend
Jag the constitution so as to Sc
cure beyond peradventure the
power sought"
Can he go farther? Could he
be more definite? We opine not.
But he is accused OF trimming.
He says: "We should fail in
our duty if we did not try to
remedy evils, but we shall sue
ceed only five proceed patiently, |
with practical common sense as
we'll as resolution, separating the
good from the bad and holding
on to the former while endeavor-
ing to get rid OF the latter"
The country can stand this sort
of trimming and would be- pleas
ed to see congress adopt and
make a vigorous application of
Il.
Is it not altogether probable
that the provocative of this criti-
cism by the opposition lies in
this utterance of the president?
"The question of the regula-
tion of trusts stands apart from
the question of tariff revision.
There was first a long contin-
ued and organized effort to array
public sentiment against all sorts
of trusts, good and bad. Appeals
were made to ignorance and
prejudice; class distinction-:t-
self most odious-was created,
the poor arrayed against the rich,
ahd human passions played upon,
then all the ills men experience
were made chargeable to the ex-
lstence and practices of the trusts.
A great clamor being thus stirred
up against trusts the declaration
vas made and is persisted in that
these are the offspring of protec-
hon and may only be DESTROYED
BY depriving them of protection.
This has been overdone. Men .
,scall the facts that the most
aurtful trusts receive no tariff