The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1908-09-25
|OURNEY|MG IN
LAND OF DREAMS
Democratic PROPOSE.
ton for Trust Control.
Convincing Exposition of Fallacy Of
Bryan's Panacea for Solving
Problems of Modern
Business.
(From Gov. Hughes Youngstown
speech.)

speech.
When we consider remedies that are
proposed for the trusts, we find our
selves journeying IN land of dreams.
Again the magician Of 1896 waves his
wand. At a stroke difficulties disap-
pear and the complex problems Of mod
ern business are forgotten in the fas-
rination Of the simple ,panacea. And,
rs the free coinage of silver In the
ratio Of 16 to 1 was to destroy the
curse Of gold, so the new found specific
Of equal perfection is to remove the
curse Of industrial oppression. The de-
fusion of 1908 IL comparable only to
that Of twelve years ago.
The first suggestion is that the law
should prevent duplication Of di-
| rectors among competing corporations.
However advisable 1t may be to have
Independent directorates Of competing
corporations, ii would seem still more
important to have independent stock
holders, for a majority Of the stock
holders Of corporation choose the d.
rectors. If a law were passed pre-
| venting the duplication of directors 1t
would easily be evaded in the selection
Of men who would represent the same
interests. The most ordinary exper-
fence shows that it is not necessary TO
serve on board of directors in order
to control its proceedings. Whatever
the advantage of such law as is pro-
posed, it hardly rises to the dignity Of
remedy" or vindicates its title to a
place in an imposing scheme Of reform
outlined in national platform.
But the more important proposal is
that any manufacturing or trading
corporation engaged In interstate COM
merce shall be required to take out a
federal license before 1t shall be per-
United to control as much as % per
cent Of the product In which it deals"
A license is permission, and the object
Of the remedy is not to regulate large
businesses, but to destroy trusts. Hence
the supposed efficiency Of the plan is to
be found in the prohibition Of the con-
troll by any such corporation "of more
than 80 per cent Of the total amount Of
any product consumed in the United
States" This is another delusion Of
ratio.
1t might be interesting to inquire
what is the meaning of "any product
consumed in the United States" Does
1t refer to class Of commodities?
And, if so, how shall the classes be de-
fined? Or does it refer to each sepa-
rate article of commerce? And, If so,
what account does this proposal take
Of the skill and initiative of manufac-
turers who have built up a more or
less exclusive trade in particular ar
ticles, often protected by trademarks,
although in most active competition
with other articles designed for the
same general purpose and seeking the
same market? In a desire to correct
the evils of business are we to place
an embargo upon honest endeavor
whose activities present none of the
abuses requiring remedies? And, If
not, what statutory definitions shall be
found to be adequate and just if we
lay down our prohibition in terms of
volume or ratio of business and not in
terms of right and wrong? If we
adopt Mr.. Bryans proposal, to what pc
Rod of production is the prohibition
to apply? Is the excess for day or
for a month to be considered? Or is
the average production for year to be
taken? And what system shall be de-
vised by which suitable information
may be furnished in the nature of dan
ger signals along the routes of trade
20 that the manufacturer may know
when he is about to exceed the pre-
Scribed ratio? He may justly be re-
1uired to govern his own conduct, but
how shall he be apprised of the coll
duct Of others upon which is to depend
his guilt or innocence?
The patent laws confer true
monopoly in the exclusive right to man
ufacture and sell. Are these laws to
be repealed because a private mon
opoly is indefensible and intolerable?
Bryan's Crude Reasoning.
An example Of Mr.. Bryans reason
ing Is found In his statement that
when a corporation controls so per
cent Of the total product it supplies
forty millions of people with that prod
net" There are, of course, specialties
which have a limited market and are
used by relatively small number Of
the people of the United States. More
than so per cent, and indeed even as
much as 100 per cent Of the trade in
such articles may be in the control
Of a particular corporation. This may,
in fact, be relatively a small corpora
ton. 1t may never have aspired to the
unsavory renown Of trust" But by
prosecuting its particular line with
fidelity and meeting satisfactorily
limited want; or by reason Of some
secret processes or advantage Of expert
ence, it may control the trade in a CIV
en- article of commerce. Or, suppose
concern controls the whole trade in
some useful byproduct which It has
found II advantageous to make. is the
trade to De prohibited?
-