Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1906-09-04

i
torates. A group of men organized or
obtained control of several corpora
tions doing business with each other,
and then proceeded to swindle the
stockholders Of the various corpora
tions for which they acted.
| Many of the trusts control prices by
| the same methods-the same group OF
men secure control Of several COM
peting corporations and the manage
ment Is thus consolidated. 1t Is worth
while to consider whether blow may
not be struck at the trusts by law
making 1t illegal for the same person
to act as director or officer of two cor
porations which deal with each 9TH
er, or are engaged in the same general
/ business.
| A still more far-reaching remedy
was proposed by the Democratic plat
form of 1900, namely, the requiring
| Of corporations to take out Federal
licenss before engaging in Interstate
conn. .erce This remedy Is simple,
easily applied and comprehensive. If
corporations were required to take
out Federal license. the Federal gov
ernment could then issue a license up
on terms and conditions which would
protect the public. A corporation diff
fers from a human being in that 1t
has no natural rights, and as all OF Its
rights are derived from the statutes
| Ii can be limited or restrained, accord
ing as the public welfare may require.
The control which congress has over
| Interstate commerce Is complete. NO
party can long be credited with sin
cerity If 1T condemns the trusts with
words only and then permits the trusts
| to employ all the instrumentalities OF
| interstate commerce In the carrying
\ - afo NIL q far
easier to prevent monopoly than to
watch it and punish 1t, and this pre-
vention can be accomplished In a
practical way by refusing license to
any corporation which controls more
than a certain proportion OF the total
product-this proportion to be arbi-
| trarily fixed at a point which Will give
free operation to competition.
The tariff question is very closely
allied to the trust question and the
| reduction of the tariff furnishes an
easy means of limiting the extortion
which the trusts can practice.
While free trade would not neces-
sarily make a trust absolutely i'm
possible, still 1t Is probable that few
manufacturing establishments would
dare to enter into a trust IL the pres
ident were empowered to put upon
the free list articles competing with
those controlled by trust. l cannot
permit this opportunity to pass with
out expressing the opinion that the
principles embodied in the protective
tariff have been the fruitful source Of
| a great deal of political corruption as
we'll as the support OF many or our
most iniquitous trusts.
1t Is difficult to condemn the man
ufacturers for uniting to take advant-
age Of high tariff schedule when the
schedule is framed on the theory that
the Industries need all the protection
given and 1t is not likely that the Dene-
| ficiaries Of these schedules will consent
| TO their reduction so long as the pubic
waits for the tariff to be reformed by
| its friends.
But one of the worst features Of a
tariff, levied not for revenue but for
the avowed purpose of protection, Is
that II fosters the idea that men should
use their votes to advance their own
financial interests. For generation the
| fat" has been fried out Of the manu-
facturers by the Republican campaign
committee, and then the manufacturers
have been reimbursed by Legislation.
With the public conscience educated TO
believe that this open purchase OF leg
islation was entirely proper no wonder
| that insurance companies have used the
elections-no wonder that trusts have
hastened to purchase immunity from
punishment with liberal donations.
How can we draw a moral line, he
tween the senator and congressman
elected by the trusts to prevent hostlie
legislation and the senator or con-
gresham kept in congress by the
manufacturers to secure friendly legis-
lation? The party which justifies the
one form Of bribery cannot be reiied
upon to condemn the other.
There never was a time when tarin
reform could be more easily entered
upon. for the manufacturers, by SELL
ing abroad cheaper than at home, as
many of them do, have not only shown
their ingratitude toward those VINO
built the tariff wall for them, but they
have demonstrated their ability to sell
/ in competition with the world.
The railroad question is also inter-
woven with the trust question. Near
| ly all the private monopolies have re-
ceived rebates or secured other adVan-
tages over competitors. Absoluteiy
equality Of treatment at the hands OF
the railroads would go far toward the
crippling of the trusts and l re1olce
that the president has had the courage
to press this question upon congress.
While the law, as 1t was finally dis
torted by the senate, is not all that
could be wished, 1t deserves a talr
trial.
Rate regulation was absolutely nee
essary and 1t furnishes some relief from
the unbearable conditions which pre-
viously existed; but we must not for
get that the vesting Of this enormous
power in the hands Of commission
appointed by the president introduces
Inr a QnnninttVp
has the power to fix rates, and can by
the exercise of that power increase
or decrease by hundreds Of millions OF
dollars the annual revenues Of the rail-
roads, will not the railroads feel tnat
| they have large pecuniary interest IN
| the election of a president friendly 10
the railroads? Experience has demon
| trated that municipal corruption Is
largely traceable to the fact that fran
chise corporations desire to control the
city council and thus increase their
dividends. If the railroad managers
adopt the same policy the sentiment
In favor of the ownership Of the rail-
roads by the government Is likely TO
| increase throughout the country as
| the sentiment In favor Of municipal
ownership has increased in the cities.
I have already reached the conclusion
that railroads partake so much OF the
nature of a monopoly that they must
ultimately become public officials In
the interest of the whole community
in accordance with the well defined
theory that public ownership Is neces-
sary where competition Is impossible.
l do not know that the country Is ready
for this change. l do not know that
| a majority of my own party favor IT,,
but l believe that an increasing num-
Der Of the members of all parties see
in public ownership the sure remedy
for discrimination between persons and
places and for the extortionate rates
for the carrying of freight and passen-
gers.
Believing, however. that the opera =
ton of all the railroads by the Federal
government would result in a centrali-
zation which would all but obliterate
states lines, l prefer to see only the
trunk lines operated by the Federal
government and the local lines by the
several states governments.
Some have opposed this dual owner
ship as impracticable but investigation
in Europe has convinced me that 1t Is
entirely practicable. Nearly all the
railroads of Germany are owned by
the several states, the Empire not
even owning the trunk lines, and YET
the inter- state traffic is in no wise OBJ
structed. The ownership and operation
of the local lines by the several states
governments is not only feasible but II