The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1907-07-16


as are present"
Judge Morris then reiterated hli
statements about giving the case care
ful consideration, especially that II
the hands Of the prosecution, in "ar
effort to learn whether the men were
misled in regard to the legality oi
their acts,
CONSIDERS SUGGESTION.
1T has been suggested to the court =
continued the Judge that the bridge
men have been indicted in several
other counties and tried at great ex
pense to them and more or less annoy.
ance. The court will consider this
suggestion.
These men have formed pool that
has controlled the work In a num-
ger Of counties for years, and they
perfected scheme to get money from
the taxpayers. Therefore, the sug.
gestion about prosecution in several
counties has little in II to cause the
court to extend mercy. =
These men went into business with
the single purpose Of preventing com.
| petition. II is sufficient to know that
they pooled their business that they
might have the prices they asked
without any reference to whether
the taxpayers suffered. In so act
ing, they became-as all becomes .
party to the plunder of money TO
which they have no right
1T is hard to distinguish between
the poor who take, without license,
the money Of the rich, and the rich
who take, without license, the money
of the poor.
SHOULD KNOW RlGHf. "A
Whether they apply to persons
singly or in combinations, the prin-
oiple Of right and wrong should gov
ern all good citizens in all transac.
tons.
These violations lin the bridge
cases) charge but one violation of the
law. 1t is true that the act complained
Of was done before the decision Of the
supreme court. II is also true that |
the defendants have been caused some |
annoyance by having to defend proper
indictments.
But these cases involve more than
the convenience of the defendants,
II this violation OF the law continues,
none can tell what attitude will finally
be taken by the people against those
who are disposed to plunder by elm.
mating competition Of trade.
This law was passed in 1898. Who
ther II has been effective is open to
doubt. The results have not been
10 perschs having the
welfare Of the country In mind.
"The law has been in force almost
.en years, and yet there is but one eN
,eption-and that In this county a
year ago-where a fine was the only
imposed. The fine may
,e from $50 to $1,000.
TRUSTS NOT CURBED.
Have trusts been checked? Have
hese combinations been broken up, !
,xcept on the surface? Has competi.
ion been restored? have looked in I
ain, but | am not convinced that l
.hange has been made, even In lit. I
le degree. Business has proceeded
Is before.
THE particular agreement under
which the business Of these oTganiza'
ions has been transacted may have
,een destroyed, and the particular
BUSINESS organizations through which
hey operated abandoned, but, after |
II these prosecutions, have the peo- [
lie, who have been paying the price q
xacted by these combinations, obtain /
d any relief? 4
What is a nominal fine In cases q
here men take money 20 which they "
re not entitled? II bridgemen In. G
rease the cost Of a bridge 70 u county.
hat does a fine signify? +
III you men are selling lumber and q
lcreasing the price So or $40 at viii,
nd have put the public at your mer. b
y, what does a fine signify when, aft 1
years OF business along these lines, a
y chance you are brought into court2 h
III you men who are making brick 1
IN add 81 or more a thousand to
ie price and the people must pay,
hat does a fine signify? 1t would :.
: almost making a premium on the :,
rice Of the commodity" "