New-York tribune., 1907-08-20

would conopete with II to give UP their business
There must in other words. be an element OF
dIress m the conduct of it's business toward re-
customers in the trade and its competitors before
mere aggregation Of plant becomes an unlawful
,nononoIy IL is perfectly conceivable that in
The interest of economy of production a grear
number of plants may be legitimately assem-
bIed under the ownership of one corporation.
In such a case 1t is either not a trust. il the
term involves unlawfulness. or 1t is a lawful
trust if a trust merely means a company which
has assembled a large part OF the manufacture
inc DIant of auv product 1t may be. as Mr.
T2rvau in his controversy with Senator Bev-
eridge saws that there is a limit in the union
- conitaI and nIant that will effect economy
and that after that limit is reached the Increase
of the plant or the capital rather enlarges the
risk in the management of the business. and
JfIxeIv 70 increase the cost of production rather
than TO diminish it. III so, tneh When cor
poration goes beyond that limit there IS a rea-
sonable presumption that ~ IS dOlhS SO rOr the
purpose of mOnOpOlizing trade
AGGREGATION AND COMPETITION.
II must be borne in mind that in country
like this. where there is an enormous floating
capital awaiting investment. the time within
which competition by construction OF new plants
can be introduced into any business Is compare
tivelv short. rarely exceeding yesr- and usually
in even less time than that Many enterprises
have been organized Or -tsa theory that mere
aeeregatfon of all or nearly all existing plants
I'm a line of manufacture without regard to
economy of production destroys competition
They have most Of them gone into bankruptcy.
CoupetitiOn in a profitable business VIII not be
excluded by the mere aggregation or many ex-
listing
company thereby effects great economy or takes
some Illegal method to avoid competition and to
perpetuate a hold on the business
SHOW UNLAWFUL TRUSTS.
Frequently contracts have been made with
exciusiyeIy with the trust on the threat that II
there is not this exclusive dealing then at a
time when they most need the product 1t will
not be sold to them at all. or only at very high
price and one prOhibitive of profit on their part
Again the tremendous wealth and resources OF
the trust are exerted to destroy a rival IN par
ticuIar locality by selling at very low price in
that neighborhOOd and driving him out OF busi-
ness and then raising the prices 1hls can be
easily detected by the inequality OF tne prices
which the trust asks for the same commodity in
different localities under the same conditions
Such or like methods bring the company within
tho descriptfOn of a monopoly, at which the
antitrust law is directed / am inclined 70 the
Opinfon that the time is near at hand for an
amendment of the antitrust law defining IN
more detail the evils against which IL IS aimed,
making clearer the distinction between lawful
agreements reasonably restraining trade and
those which are pernicious in their effect, and
particularly denOUnCing the various devices for
monOpOizing trade which prosecutions and IN
vestigations have shown 70 be used IN actual
practice. The decisions Of the courts and the
experience Of executive and prosecuting officers
make the framing of such a statute possible II
will have the good effect OF making much clearer
TO those business men who would obey the laws
the methods to be avoided
SECRET REBATES MAINTAIN MONOPOLY.
Another and perhaps the most effective
method IN Cne past Tor an unlawful trust 10
maintain itself has been 10 secure secret rebates
or other unlawful advantage in transportation.
by threat of Withholding business from the car
rier This is undoubtedly what has enabled tha
Standard Oil Company and the Sugar Trust and
other great combinations 20 reap Illegal har-
vest and TO drive all competitors from the field.
If by asserting complete federal control over the
Interstate railways of the country we can sup
press secret rebates and determinations OF other
kinds. shall have gone long way in the
suppression OF the unlawful trusts
WOULD RESTRAIN TRUSTS
Mr. Bryan asks me what l would do with the
trusts / answer that / would restrain UnlaW-
full trusts with all the efficiency of iHjuncJive
process and would punish with all the severity
of criminal prosecution every attempt the
part OF aggregated capital through the Illegal
means have described to suppress competition
There has been great aCti-ity in the Depart
ment of Commerce and Labor and in the De-
partnent Of Justice in an effort TO investigate