The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-07-20

islature has passed law hoycotti lg
all goods of trust manufacture, and
making 1t felony for anybody to sell
within the State borders articles made
hS any trust or combination. The ar
gunlent in support of this, measure Is
to tho effect that 1t Will hurt The
trusts, help the independent inanufas-
sition TO compete with the trusts else
where.
1t cannot be denied that this is dam
gerousiy heroic law-making, and as a
restriction on retailer and consumer 1t
us equally inconsistent, coming from
a Legislative body who, no doubt. in
d.vidually and collectively, disapprorc
of protective tariff because 1t deprives
them of the right to buy goods from
any market anywhere. On the surface
such law appears questionable, both
in constitutionality and in merit.
But even If it is valid, 1t is inter
esting to speculate how such a slap
dash enactment would work out. OBJ
viously, as far as ii concerns many ar
ticles OF trust manufacture, its chief
burdens would fall where so many
present day burdens fall-upon the re-
taller. In regard to these articles, the
consumer would possibly be put to
some little trouble. but that is about
all. For no matter how virile an OPP
poser of combines the individual con-
sumer may be, he is not going to sub
stantiate his hate by learning to smoke
a new kind Of cigar or to chew an
inferior variety of plug Give him
tattles to fight and he will fight them
speeches to make and he will declaim;
but he has no intention of foregoing
his chosen commodities, and. If need
be. he will order them from beyond
the state border rather than lose them
Accordingly, under this law the re-
taller would suffer loss in his trade If
he should cheerfully submit to the sac
rifice and obey the law, but If he
should defy the law it does not follow
by any means that he would straight
way be conducted to the State peni-
Tertiary. In order to convict him of
violating this statute. for instance, by
selling sugar made by the American
Sugar Company. the prosecution would
necessarily have to establish the fact
that this company is an illegal COM
binaton. This would require proof,
and 1t would not SUFFICE TO rely on the
popular belief of the nature of the
American Sugar Company. And fin
ally and above all, it Is not likely that
the Supreme Court of the United
penal statute by which a State con-
fines one of its citizens in the peniten-
tary for selling to other citizens goods
which are in themselves entirely harm-
less.
Unquestionably the Texans, and
there are about three million and a
half of them, have it in their power
to boycott trust-made goods. No
doubt they could get along fairly well
without trustmade goods. But will
they do it because their Legislature
| tells them to do SO? Will they be
willing to do without steel rails fol
4 their railroads, and to pay a greater
/ price for their kerosene Oil? To max,
this anti trust statute effective the,
must cooperate in support of 1t. VIII
they do it? Admitting that they hat,
+. i.i- "a o;pc hat
probably hate to spend money 'unneces
/ sarily and to live uncomfortably. AS.
suming that this statute comes in re-
/ Spouse to popular cutlery against the
1 trusts. the Texas Lcsisla ture has very
1 cleverly managed TO put it up tt
! the people; and while the issue thus
produced is trifle disconcertlng az
la test and measure of sincerity OF
| their poemics against the trusts, still
unless they faithfully and enthusiastic
/ cally obey their Legislature in this
| law, they will furnish undenablt
| ground for the accusation that theil
! attitude to illegal combinations close,
liy resembles that of the Athenians tt
/ Alcibiades-thst is, they hate them
lbut cannot do without them.