The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-09-22
REVISION Of
The TARIFF
NO CURE
FOR TRUSTS

foster a monopoly which does III, why, o
| course, no protecticnist would object to {
modification sufficient to remedy the evil
| But In very few cases does the so-calle'
trust really monopolize the market. TAX
any very big corporation which controls
say something over half the products o
q given industry. Surely In re-arrangint
the schedules affecting such big cor
poration. II would be necessary to con
| slider the interests of It's smaller competi
tors, which control the remaining part
and which, being weaker, would suffeI
most from any tariff designed to punish
all the producers; for, of course. thu
tariff must be made light or heavy fol
big and little products alike. Moreover
such corporation necessarily employ:
very many thousands Of workmen, ant
the minute we proceeded from denuncia
tion to ection 1t would be necessary tt
consider the interests of these workmen.
Many Trusts Are Unprotected.
Furthermore. the products of many
trusts are unprotected and would be en-
tirely unaffected by any change In the
tariff. or at most very slightly so. Tho
Standard Oil company offers case ir
point; and the corporations which con-
troll the anthracite coal output offer an
other. for there Is no duty whatever or
anthracite coal.
l am not now discussing the question
Of the tariff as such. whether from the
standpoint between those who believe in
protective tariff and those who believe
In free trade; nor from the standpoint
of those who. while they believe in a pro-
tective tariff, feel that there could be a
Encouragement of our schedules. either
by direct legislation or by reciprocity
treaties. which would result in enlarging
our markets: nor yet from the stand
point of those who feel that stability Of
economic policy Is at the moment out
prime need, and that the benefits to be
derived from any change in schedules
would not compensate for the damage
to business caused by the widespread
agitation which would follow any at
tempted revision Of the tariff at this
moment.
Without regard to the wisdom of any
one of those three positions, it remains
true that the real evils connected with
the trusts cannot be remeded by any
change in the tariff laws. The trusts
can be damaged by depriving them of the
benefits Of protective tariff only on con-
dtlon of damaging all their smaller COM
petitors and all the wage workers en-
ployed In the industry. This point Is
very important. and it is desirable to
avoid any save wilful misunderstanding.
am not now considering whether or not.
on grounds totally unconnected with the
trusts, 1t would be well to lower the
duties on various schedules. either by
direct legislation or by legislation or
treaties designed to secure reciprocal ad-
vantages from the nations with which we
trade.
Tariff and the Trusts.
My point Is that changes in the tariff
ciab OF
the trusts. save as they shared in the
general harm or good proceeding from
such changes. No tariff change would
help one of our smaller corporations or
one of our private individuals in business,
still less one of our wageworkers, as
against large corporation in the same
business; on the contrary, If it bore
heavily on the large corporation, 1t would
inevitably be felt still more by that COR
poration's weaker rivals, while any in
furious result would of necessity be
shared by both the employer and en-
ployed in the business concerned. The
immediate Introduction of substantial
free trade in all articles manufactured
by trusts. that is by the larger and most
successful corporations. would not affect
some of our most powerful business COR
porations in the least save for the dam
age done to the business welfare of the
fected, but much less so than their weak
er rivals, while the loss would be div
ided between the capitalists and the la
borers; and after the years of panic and
distress had been lived through and some
return to prosperity had occurred. even
though all We're on a lower plane of
prosperity than before. the relative diff
ference between the trusts and their ri
walls would remain as marked as ever.
~ n yryN NIe I,1
would have suffered relatively
to, and in the interest of. its foreign COM
petitors but its relative position toward
its American competitors would probably
be improved: little would have been
done toward cutting out or minimizing
the evils in the trusts: nothing toward
securing adequate control and regulation
of the large modern corporations. In
other words, the question of regulating
the trusts with view to minimizing
or abolishing the eXils existent in them,
is separate and apart from the question
of tariff revision.
You must face the fact that only harm
VIII come from proposition to attack
the so-called trusts In vindictive spirit
by measures conceived solely with q de-
sire of hurting them, without any regard
as to whether or not discrimination
should be made between the good and
cNh III lHeH' anu WITHOUT even any re-
gard as to whether necessary sequence
Of the action would be the hurting of
other interests The adoption of such n
policy would mean temporary damage to
the trusts, because 1t would mean tenn
porary damage to all of our business in
terests; but the effect would he only tenn
porary, for, exactly as the damage affect
ed all alike, good and bad. so the reaction
would affect all alike, 'good and bad
NJ let
n which | firmly believe Is the only
method of eliminating the real evils of the
rust, must come through wisely and
cautiously framed legislation, which shall
lin. In the first place, to give definite
control to some sovereign over the great
corporations, and which shall be fol-
owed. when once this power has been
conferred, by system giving to the gov
the full knowledge which Is the
essential for satisfactory action. Then,
when this knowledge one of the essential
features of which Is proper publicity, has
)een gained, what further steps Of any
Kind are necessary can be raken with
he confidence born of the possession of
,ower to deal with the subject and of a
borough knowledge of what ought and
'an be done In the matter. We need ad-
litional power and we need knowledge
DUR Constitution was formed when the
condition was SO different that
zach state could be wisely left to handle
he corporations within its limits as 1t
aw fit. Nowadays, all the numerous cor
'oratons which am considering do what
$ really an interstate business, and as
he states have proceeded on very diff |
erent lines In regulating them, they are
'ften organized in a state in which they
10 little or no business, and do an enor- |
nous business In other states, to the
pirit of whose laws they may be openly |
ntagonistic.
No Prospect of Agreement.
1t might he better II all the states could |
gree to work along the same lines I'm |
ealing with these corporations but see |
ot the slightest prospect of such agree |