Albuquerque citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1907-1909, 1908-08-25

United States; and, third. a law COM
pelling such licensed corporations 10
sell to all purchasers in all parts of
the country on the same terms, after
making due allowance for cost Of
transportation"
Here is a plain. candid statement
of the party's position. There is No
quibb bling, no evasion. no ambiguity.
A private monopoly is indefensible
and intolerable. 1t is bad-bad in
principle, and bad in practice. No
apology can be offered for it, and
no people should endure 1t. Our
0arty's position is entirely in har-
ony with the position of jefferson.
With a knowledge of human nature
which few men have eQualled and
none surpassed, and with extraordin-
airy foresight, he expressed unaltera-
BILE opposition to every form of pri-
vate monopoly. The student of his
tory will find that upon this subject,
as upon other subjects of government,
the great founder of the Democratic
party took his position upon the side
of the whole people and against those
who seek to make a private use of
government, or strive to secure spe-
cial privileges at the expense of the
public.
l have, in discussing the tariff ques-
ton, presented one of four remedies.
namely. the removal 1f the tariff
from imports which compete with
trust made goods. This, we believe,
would greatly lessen the extortion
practiced by the trusts and bring
about the dissolution of many monop-
olistic combines. But we are not sat
isfied merely with the lessening of
extortion or with the dissolution of
some of the trusts.
Because the private monopoly is in
defensible and intolerable, the Demo-
cratic party favors its determination.
1t pledges itself to the vigorous en-
forcement of the criminal law against
trust magnates and officials. 1t is
impossible for the Republican party
TO enforce the present criminal law
against trust officials; these officials
are Intimately connected with the Re-
publican party in the present cam
paign. Take, for instance, the chair
man of the Republican speakers COM
mittee, Mr.. Dupont, of Delaware. He
is the defendant in suit which the
government brought and is now pros
ecutng. Mir. Dupont is charged with
violation of the antitrust law. Why
should he be put on the executive
committee and then oe given control
of the speaking part of the cam paign?
If you talk to a Republican leader
about penitentiary punishment for Of
| tenders, he favors flning the corpora
! tlon on the ground that it is impos-
sible to convict individuals, but when
you urge fines you are told that fines
are unjust to innocent stockholders.
! We favor both fine and Imprisonment
| but we think III is better TO prevent
monopclies tina to first authorize
them 10 prey upon the public and
then try to punish them for doing so.
Mr.. Taft favors control of trusts in
stead of determination, but after years
OF experience the people have learned
that the trusts control the govern
| ment.
Our platform does not stop with
the enforcement of the law; it de-
mands the enactment of such addi-
! tional legislation as may be necessary
! to make it impossl Bile for a private
monopoly to exist in the United States.
The Democratic party does not
!
/ wrong or with a denunciation of it,
! 1t proceeds to outline remedies. The
| first is d law preventing a duplica-
ton of directors among competing
| corporations. No one can object to
thls remedy unless he is in sym apathy
with the trusts, rather than with the
! people who are victimized by the
trusts. There is no cas- er way of
l.-Tt q llVner -
board of directors serve for a num-
Der of competing corporations. 1t is
not necessary for corporations to enter
into an agreement for the restraint of
trade If the corporations can, with
out violating the law. reach the same
end by eiecting the same directors.
The second remedy is one upon
which l desire TO dwell at some
length. We believe it To oe a simple,
complete and easily enforced rem
edy. AS stated in the platform it is:
"A license system which will, with
out abridging the right of each state
| to create corporations. or its right to
regulate as it will foreign corpora
! tionS doing business within its limits,
make 1t necessary for a manufactur-
! ing or trading corporation engaged in
interstate commerce TO take out fed
eral license before it shall be permit
ted to control as much as twenty five
per cent of the product in which 1t
deals, the license to protect the pub
lie from watered stock and to pro-
hibit the control by such corporation
of more than fifty per cent of the
total amount of any product cOnsum-
ed in the United States"
II will be noticed. in the first place,
that care was taken by those who
drew the platform 10 provide that
there should be no abridgment of the
right of state 10 create corporations,
or of its right to regulate as It will
foreign corporations doing business
within its limits. This plan, there
fore, does not in the least infringe
upon the right of the states to pro-
tect their own people. 1t simply pro-
vides for the exercise by Congress of
the power vested in it to regulate in
terstate commerce. AS long as a cor
poration confines itself to the state