The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1902-02-19
poly is vicious, dangerous and intoler-
able to say nothing of extortion.

/. aple 10 say nothing OF eXtortion.
When an independent corporation O
concern cannot enter the business o
commercial world upon it's merits an,
meet legitimate competition aud tax,
even chances with other like concern,
it should go to the wall and should no
be given special privileges to practlc,
their outrageous extortions upon tn,
great consuming public.
Nh. Jno. p. Thomas, Jr., opposed
the bill. 1t is founded upon a perniciou'
and erroneous principle. He cid no
claim that trusts should not be re-
gulated. But capital cannot be pre-.
vented from making combinations. Nc
State Legislature can prevent comb.
nation, He "a doubtful if ii is wise
to attempt to 81 prevent them. But il
is h duty of every citizen TO see that
they are properly regulated. There is
a correct principle of legislation for the
State to regulate prices. The combi-
nation OF railroads into systems has
not in an evil sense affected the PEG.
pie, because the State has regulated
the rates. He doubted the truth of the
saying that I" Competition Is the life of
trade" He declared that the cfi-
cheney of the service is increased with
the size of the concerns. Whenever
mercantile or manufacturing establish
ments become combined until they be-
come monopolies, then they should be
regulated. He agreed that there are
evils in the operations of the trusts,
but they cannot be cured by grating
on statute books laws taken bodily
from the statute books of Texas. He
then attacked the bill in some of it's
provisions, particularly the section pre-
venting the organization of companies
to control the sale of patents and
patented articles. This would prevent
a company FROM being organized to
manufacture a patented cotton planter,
etc. He did not believe that, when
ever foreign capital is referred 10
in legislation they should make the
cry, don't drive foreign capital
away" but he believes that the foreign
capital should be subjecs to regulations.
However, there should be a bill to cor
rect a specific evil and not to generalize.
Mr.. M. L. Smith, of Kershaw, fol-
lowed Mr.. Thomas. The people of
the State had in 1894 elected their
wisest men to frame a constitution for
the State. That constitution makes it
mandatory upon the General Assem-
bly, to pass laws to prevent the tOrma-
ton of trusts, combinations of capital.
The constitution says "shall." 1t is
not in the organic law of the law of
the State to g regulate" as Mr.. Them
as argued, but to "prevent."
Mr.. Smith then went on TO say that
the law now on the statute books is in
violation of tho interstate commerce
law, and will some day be wiped off
the statute books.
The antitrust laws in 33 States are
no mo radical than this proposed
measure. There is need for proper
antitrust laws. He declared that if
this kind of law would keep capital out
of the State, why does Texas hold on
to the Hogg law? The bill allows N
firm or n corporation " unite with
another, providing the combination is
not for the purpose of controlling
prices and driving out competitors.
That is what the bill seeks to prohibit.
1t is a question of fact to be passed up
on by a jury.
The constitution gives the right to
the Legislature TO. take away the cor
porate rights of companies violating
the laws of the State.
He was followed by Mr.. Weston,
who declared that he is not the repre-
sentative of any trust. The General
Assembly cannot in being true to it.
self do anything which will injure The
interests of the State. He told how l.
Q. @. Lamar had gone contrary to the
wishes of the people of Mississippi, but
had by them been indicated, as he
had done what was right and what
they afterwards saw was right. He
attacked popular legislation which will
not be beneficial to the interests of the
State. Like Addison's Cato, he de-
plored the creature who would become
great on his States ruin.
Mr.. Weston went on to say that if
South Carolina should adopt such a
law as this she would be blacklisted
and capital would seek investments
elsewhere. He stated that this bill
had been killed two years ago.. (Mr.
johnson stated that it had not been
killed in this House,) Mr. Weston
answered that The House might have
passed it hoping for the Senate to kill
1T. AS D stakeholder In q fertilizer
company which hal sold to the Vir-
ginia Carolina CHEMICAL Company he
declared that they found little money
in the business and were glad to sell to
the larger corporation. This bill
would keep a man from accepting the
agency fora bicycle or a sewing ma
chine manufactures.
Mr.. Fucker asked if the Virginia
Carolina had built q single plant in the
State for the States interests. Mr..
Weston replied that it had done what
was equivalent, it had bought up
bankrupt plants.
Mr.. DeBruhl IN reply to MI. Weston
said that if this bill is wrong in prin-
ciple, 81 is the law now on the statute
books and so was the action of the
Legislature authorizing the attorney
general to investigate. The policy of
the State was settled by the constitu ,
ton in 1896.
He declared that there Is nothing in
the bill to keep foreign capital out of
the State. If capital doesen't want TO
aquiesce in the laws of a State, it
should keep out of the State. The
farmers who have had the price of
their cotton seed reduced arbitrarily
know whether or not trusts are good
things for the people. He didn't
think the Federal Congress could reach