The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1908-07-28

II IS not now necessary, however
to discuss the relative merit of such
propositions, but it is enough merely
TO affirm the necessity for some meth
cd by which greater executive super
vision can be given to the Federal
Government over those businesses in
which there is a temptation to viola
tons of the antitrust law.
Antitrust Law.
The possible operation of the anti
trust law under existing rulings of the
Supreme Court has given rise to sug-
gestions for it's necessary amendment
to prevent it's application to cases
which it is believed were never in the
contemplation of the trainers of the
statute. Take two instances: A mer-
chant or manufacturer engaged in
legitimate business that covers GER
tain States, wishes to sell his business
and his good will, and so in the terms
of the sale obligates himself to the
purchaser not to go into the same
business in those States. Such a re-
straint Of trade has always been en-
forced at common law. Again, the
employees of an interstate railway COM
bine and enter upon a peaceable and
lawful strike to secure better wages.
At common law this was not a re-
straint of trade or commerce or vio-
lation of the rights of the company or
of the public. Neither case ought to
be made violation of the antitrust
law. My own impression is that the
Supreme Court would hold that Meth
er of these instances are within it's in
hibition, but, if they are to be so re-
garded, general legislation amending
the law is necessary.
Democratic Plank to Limit.
The suggestion of the Democratic
platform that trusts be ended by for
bidding corporations to hold more than
so per cent. of the plant in any line of
manufacture is made without regard
to the possibility of enforcement or
the real evil in trusts. A corporation
controlling As or so per cent. of the
products may by well known methods
frequently effect monopoly and stamp
out competition in a part of the coun-
try as completely as if it controlled
6U or ~ per cent. tnereOI.
Plank ImpracticaI.x
The proposal to compel every cor
poration to sell it's commodities at the
same price the country over, allowing
for transportation, it utterly imprecti-
cable If it can be shown that in ord
er to drive out competition, corpor-
alton owning large part of the plant
producing an article is selling in one
part of the country, where it has COM
petitors, at a low and Improbable
price, and in another part of the coun-
try, where it has none, at an exOrbi-
tant price, this is evidence that it is at
tempting an unlawful monopoly, and
justifies conviction under the anti
trust law but the proposal to super
wise the business OF corporations in
such a way as to fix the price of COM
modities and compel the sale at such
price is as absurd and socialistic plank
as was ever inserted in a Democratic
platform.
Republican and Democratic Policies.
The chief difference between the
Republican and the Democratic plat
forms is the difference which has here
tofore been seen between the policies
of Mr. Roosevelt and those which have
been advocated by the democratic can
didate, Mr.. Bryan. Mr.. Roosevelt's
policies have been progressive and
regulative; Mr.. Bryan's, destructive.
Mr. Roosevelt has favored regulation
of the business in which evils have
grown up so as to stamp out the evils
and permit the business to continue.
The tendency of Mr.. Bryan's proposals
have generally been destructive of the
business with respect to which he is
demanding reform. Mr.. Roosevelt
would compel the trusts to conduct
their business in a lawful manner and
secure the benefits of their operation
and the maintenance of the prospect
ty of the country of which they are an
important part; while Mr.. Bryan
would extirpate and destroy the entire
business in order to stamp out the
evils which they have practiced.
Advantage of Combination.
The combination Of capital in large
plants to manufacture goods with the
SEcdlcSI SCouOIHy just DIS ucCSSSdls
as the assembling of the parts of a
machine to the economical and more
rapid manufacture of what in old
times was made by hand. The Gov
eminent should not interfere with one
any more than the other, and when
such aggregations of capital are legiti-
mate and are properly controlled, for
they are then the natural results of
modern enterprise and are beneficial
to the public. In the proper operation
of competition the public will soon
share with the manufacturer the ad
vantage in economy of operation and
lower prices.
The Unlawful Trust.
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 pub
lie derives no benefit and we have a
monopoly. 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 it rather than of
o.