Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-09-22
NOT A TRUST CURE.
Continued from page -
Savings banks are as highly special

Savings banks are as highly speciai-
lied class Of corporations as ram o'o''
and we cannot force too Tar the ANA
logy with other corporations put 'nei@
are certain conditions, which, tniiih'
we can lay down as indispehsapie ~
the proper treatment of great corPora-
lions.
"Refore speaking, however, OF Will
can be done by way of remedy let me
say a word or two as to certain pr
posed remedies which, in my Judsnieh.
would be ineffective or mischieVous.
THE first thing to remember Is 'iat
| if we are to accomplish anything sooa
at all it must be by resoluteiy Keeping
in mind the intention to do away Win
any evils in the conduct of big corpora
tions, while steadfastly refusing 10 as
sent to indiscriminate assault upon oil
forms of corporate capital as such.
| "Demagogic denunciation OF wealth
is never wholesome, and generally DAN
gerous; and net few Of the proposed
methods of clrbing the trusts are dan-
gerous, chiefly because all inslncere ao-
vocacy of the impossible is dangerous.
| Nor can we afford to tolerate any
proposal which will strike at the So
called trusts only by striking at the
general well being. The men who pro-
pose to get rid of the evils of the trusts
by measures which will do away with
this general well being advocate a pol
icy which would not only be a damage
to the community as whole, but which
would defeat it's own professed cpJect.
IF we are forced to the alternative
| H.
of Us prosper somewhat, though few
of us prosper too much, or else system
under which no one prospers enough,
why, of course, we will choose the Tor
mer.
"A remedy much advocated at the
moment is to take off the tariff from all
articles which are made by trusts. TO
do this it will be necessary first to de-
fine trusts.
| THE language commonly used by the
| advocates of the method implies that
they mean all articles made by large
corporations, and that the changes IN
tariff are to be made with punitive in
tent toward these large corporations.
"Of course if the tariff is to be chang
ed in order to punish them, it should
be changed so as to punish those that
do i'll, not merely those that are pros
Iperous.
1T would neither be just nor expedi-
ent to punish the big corporations as
big corporations. Some of these cor
porations do well and other do ill. If
in any case the tariff is found to fos-
ter monopoly which does i'll, why, of
course. no protectionst would object to
a modification of the tariff sufficient to
remedy the evil
''But in very few cases does the So
called trust really monopolize the mar
ket. Take any very big corporation
which controls, say, something over
half the products of a given industry.
Surely in rearranging the schedules af-
fecting such a big corporation it would
be necessary to consider the interests
of its smaller competitors which con-
troll the remaining part.
| Moreover, such a corporation neces-
sarily employs very many thousands of
| WOrkmen, and the minute we proceed
ed from denunciation to action it would
be necessary to consider the interests OF
these Workmen.
Furthermore, the products of many
trusts are unprotected and would be
lentirely unaffected by any change in
the tariff, or at most very slightly so.
THE Standard Oil Company offers 6
case in point, and the corpora tions
which control the anthracite coal out
put offer another--for there is no duty
| whatever on anthracite coal.
| Il am not now discussing the oues.
ton of the tariff as such, whether from
the standpoint of the fundamental diff.
ference between those VINO believe in a
protective tariff and those who believe
in free trade, or from the standpoint OF
those who, while they believe in a pro-
ltective tariff, feel that there could be a
Encouragement of our schedules, either
by direct legislation or by reciprocity
treaties, which would result in en-
inrging our markets: nor yet from the
standpoint Of those who feel that sta
bllity of economic policy is at the mo-
lment our prime economic need, and
that the benefits to be derived from any
change in schedules would not compen-
safe for the damage to business caused
by the widespread agitation which
would follow any attempted general re-
vision of the tariff at this moment
| without regard to the wisdom of
lany one of those three positions. it re-
mains true that the real evils connected
with the trusts cannot be remedied by
Iany change in the tariff laws.
The trusts can be damaged by de-
Ipriving them of the benefits of a pro-
tective tariff only on condition of dam
laging all their smaller competitors and
all the wageworkers employed in the
industry.
am not now considering whether or
not, on grounds totally unccnnected
with the trusts, it would be well to
lower the duties on various schedules.
My point is that changes in the
tariff would have little appreciate eff
feet on the trusts, save as they shared
in the general harm or good proceeding
from such changes
The immediate introduction of SUBJ
stantal free trade in all articles manu-
lactured by trusts would not affect some
oil the most powerful of our business COM
pinations in the least; others would I'M
ldoubtedly be seriously affected. but much
less SO than their weaker rivals. while
the loss would be divided between the
lcapltai1sts and the laborers; and after the
years of panic and distress had been
| nVed through and some returns to pros
perity mad occurred. even though all were
on lower plane of prosperity than be-
Tore, the relative difference between the