The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-08-31

definition of a trust. Because no cor
poration has an absolute and complete
monopoly Of any important product the
apologists for the trusts insist there
are in reality no trusts Others insist
that it is impossible to legislate against
such trusts as may exist without doing
injury to legitimate business For the
purpose Of this discussion, it is sufi-
cient to draw the line at the point
where competition ceases to be effec-
tive and to designate as a trust any
corporation which controls so much Ct -
the production of any article that II can
fix the terms and conditions of sale.
Legislation which prevents a mo-
nopoly not only does not injure legiti-
mate business, but actually protects le-
ultimate business from injury. We are
indebted to the young Rockefeller for
an illustration. which makes this dis
tinction clear. In defending the trust
system he is quoted as saying that, as
the American beauty cannot be brought
TO perfection without pinching off nine
ty-nine buds so that the one hundredth
bud can receive the full strength OF
the bush, so great industrial organiza-
/ tions are impossible without the elimi-
nation of the smaller ones. 1t is n
cruel illustration, but it presents per
fectly accurate picture of trust meth
the cause Of the ninety-nine enterprises
which are menaced-they must not be
sacrificed that one great combine may
flourish. and when the subject is under
stood we shall receive the cordial sup
port Of hundreds Of thousands Of bust
ness men who have themselves felt the
oppression of the trusts or who. having
observed the effect Of the trusts upon
| others. realize that their safety lies not
| in futile attempt at the restraint or
| trusts, but in legislation which will
make a private monopoly impossible.
Monopoly Must Be Prevented.
There must be no installing an is
| sue and no confusion Of the line OF
/ battle The trust as an institution will
/ have few open defenders. The policy
/ of the trust magnates will be to insist
/ upon reasonable legislation and then
! they will rely upon their power to cor
rupt legislatures and intimidate execu-
] tives to prevent the application of any
remedies which would interfere with
| the trusts. Our motto must be a pri
waite monopoly is indefensible and intOl-
! CRADLE and our plan Of attack must
| contemplate the total and complete
overthrow of the trusts. We reed not
/ quarrel over remedies. We must show
| ourselves willing to support any rem
edy which promises substantial advan-
tages to the people. in their warfare
! against monopoly. Something is to be
/ expected from the enforcement of the
/ criminal clause of the Sherman anti
! trust law. but this law must be en-
forced not against a few trusts, as at
present, but against all trusts, and the
/ aim must be to imprison the guilty.
/ not merely 10 recover a fine. What is
a fine of a thousand dollars. or even
/ ten thousand dollars. TO a trust which
/ makes a hundred thousand dollars
while the trial Is in progress? II the
| criminal clause is not good TO be en-
forced it ought to be repealed. If i'm
prisonment is too severe "A punishment
for the eminently respectable gentle
men who rob eighty millions of people
Of hundreds of millions of dollars an
nually, the language of the statute
ought TO be changed. for nothing is
more calculated 10 breed anarchy than
the failure to enforce the law against
rich criminals while it is rigidly en-
forced against petty offenders.
Republican Laws Fail.
But it is not sufficient to enforce ex-
listing laws. If ten corporations con-
spring together IN restraint OF trade
are threatened with punishment all
they have TO do now is 20 dissolve their
separate corporations and turn their
property over to a new corporation.
The new corporation can proceed to do
the same thing that the separate cor
poratiops attempted. and yet not vio-
, late the law. We need, therefore, new
, legislation and the Republican party
has failed to enact such legislation.
The Democratic party must be pre-
pared TO propose new and efficient
/ legislation.
Dishonest Directors.
Recent Investigations have brought
to light that nearly all crookedness re
vealed in the management of our large
corporations has been due to the dupn-
cation of directorates. A group of men
, organized or obtained control Of several
| corporations doing business with each
other, and then proceeded to swindle
the stockholders of the various corpo-
rations for which they acted. No man
can serve two masters, and the direc-
: tor who attempts to do so viii fail, no
matter how much money he makes be-
fore his failure is discovered. Many
of the trusts control prices by the same
methods, The same group of men Sc
cure control of several competing cor
= porations, and the management is thus
consolidated. 1t is worth while TO con-
slider whether blow may not be struck
{ ut the trusts by law making it illegal
: for the same person to act as director
or officer OF two corporations which
5 deal with each other or are engaged IN
the same general business.
A Democratic Remedy.
"a still more far reaching remedy
: was proposed by the Democratic plat
2 form of 1900, namely, the requiring Of
5 corporations to take out a federal IL
: cense before engaging in interstate
Continued on Page 8.
=