The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-07-29

 country as completely as if 1t controll. ed 60 or 70 per cent. thereof
 Compulsory Sale of Products at Fixed
 Price Impractical.
 The proposal 10 compel every cor- poration to sell it's commodities at the same price the country over, allowing for transportation. Is utterly impracu- cable. If 1t can be snown that in ore der to drive out competition, corpor. ation owning large part of the plant part of the country. where it has conn petitors, at a low and unproftable price, and in another part of the coun- try, where t has none, at an exoroi- attempting an unlawful monopoly, and justifes conviction under the antitrust law; but the proposal to supervise the business of corporations m such a way as to fix the price of commodities and compel the sale at such price Is as ab- surd and socialistic plank as was ever inserted in Democrattic political Difference Between Republican and DeInocratie Policies and Plat fermsy Former Progressive and ReGulnfivey Latter
 Radical and Destruc-
 The chief difference between the Re- publican and the Democratic platforms been seen between the policies Of MT. Roosevelt and those which have been advocated by the Democritic candidate, Mir. Bryan. Mir. Roosevelt's policies have been progressive and regulative; Mir. Bryan's destructive. MT. Roose- welt has favored regulat ton of the busi- ness in which evils have grown nd up @ so init the business to continue. The ten dency of MT. Bryan's proposals have generally been destructive of the busl- manding reform. Mr. Roosevelt. would compel the trusts to conduct their busi- ness in a lawful manner and secure the benefits of their operation and the maintenance of the prosperity of the country of which they are an impor- tant part; while MT. Bryan would ex- tirpate and destroy the entire business Tn order to stamp out the evils which Advantage of Combination of Capital
 The combination of capital in large plants to manufacture goods with the greatest economy Is just as necessary as the assembling of the parts of a machine to the economical and more rapid manufacture of what in old ment should not interfere with one any more than the other, when such ag- gregations of capital are legitimate ane ten pss1ts of qn modesgg sg enterprise anl arc beneficial to the public. In the proper operation of competition the public will soon share with the manufacturer the advantage in. economy of operation and lower prices.
 What Is an Unlawful TrustF
 When, however, such combinations are not based on any economic prin- ciple but are made merely for the purpose of controlling the market, to maintain or raise prices, restrict out put and drive out competitors, the public derives no benefit and we have monoply. There must be some use by the company of the comparatively great size of its capital and plant and extent of its output, either to coerce persons to buy of 1t rather than of some competitor or to coerce those who would compete with 1t to give up their business. There must usually in other words. be shown an element of duress ip the conduct of its busi- ress toward the customers in the trade Gnd its competitors before mere ag- gregation of capital or plant becomes an unlawful monopoly, 1t Is perfectly conceivable. that in the interest of Der of plants may be legitimately as- sombled under the ownership of one corporation. It Is important. therefore. ital and combination should be con- trolled so that the public may have the advantage of reasonable prices and that the avenues ot enterprise may smaller corporation wishing to engage in business
 Mere Aggregation of Capital Not a Violation of Anti-Trust Law. In a country like this, where, in good times, there is an enormous float Ing capital awaiting investment, the period before which effective compe- | tition, by construction of new plants, can be introduced into any business, is comparatively shorts~Earely exceed ing a year. and is usually even less Is not. therefore, necessary to poten- tial competition. Many enterprises have been organized on the theory l that mere aggregation of all. or nearly all. existing plants in line of manu- facture, without regard to economy of production. destroys competition. They ruptcy. Competition in a profitable business will not be affected by the | mere aggregation, of many existing plants under one company, unless the omy. the benefit of which 1t shares with the public, or takes some legal method to avoid competition and to perpetuate hold on the business. Proper Treatment of Trusts. Unlawful trusts should be restrain ed with all the efficiency of injunctive maintaining them should be punished with all the severity of criminal pros ecution. In order that the methods Business shali be Drought within the | law. To destroy them and to elimi- nate the wealth they represent from the producing capital of the country would entail enormous loss. and would | throw out of employment mYriads of workingmen and workingwomen. Such a result Is wholly unnecessary to the | accomplishment of the needed reform. and will infiict upon the innocent far greater punishment than upon the | guilty.
 Destructive Policy of Democratic Plat form.
 The Democratic platform does not propose to destroy the plants of the trusts physically. but 1t proposes to | do the same thing in a different way. l The business of this country is largely dependent on a protective system of | tariffs, The business done by many of | the so called trusts" is protected with | the other businesses of the country. | The Democratic platform proposes to ! take off the tariff in all article scom- | ing into competition with those pro- | ducead by the so called trusts" and to put them on the free list. If such a course would be utterly destructive | of their business. as Is intended, 1t
 would not only destroy the trusts, but | all of their smaller competitors. The ruthless and lmpracticable character I of nFnnGitfnn nla inar a