Chicago eagle. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1889-19??, 1908-08-29

mouiVS III IHuIunutDlIS, DeKuu ny COIl-
pairing the Democratic and Republican
announcements. and said in part:
The Sherman antitrust law was passed
eighteen years ago. II has criminal
clause which provides n penitentiary pun
ishment for those who cOnspire in re.
straint of trade. Ever since the enact
mcut Of the law. with the exception Of
four years. the Republican party has con.
trolled the executive department Of the
government. and during two years Of the
four it controlled the House Of Repre-
sentatives. Instead Of Democratic dere.
LECTION, the Democratic party has been
urging. year after year. the strict enforce
ment Of that law. and the Republican
party has been explaining yenr after year
why 1t was impossible to enforce Il. The
President has done something toward the
enforcement Of the law. but not nearly
enough. and the Republican leaders have
thwarted him at every point.
The Republican platform says that ex-
perience has shown that the effectiveness
Of the antitrust law could be strength
ened by amendments which will give the
federal government greater supervision
and control over and greater publicity rs
to the management of those interstate
commerce corporations which have the
power and opportunity to effect monopo-
lies. That Is all. No pointing out Of
remedies; no outlining Of plan for more
effective egislation--simply general
statement that promises nothing in par.
ticular. And Mr.. Taft's speech Of ac-
ccptance Is even weaker than the plat.
form. lie gives no evidence Of having
studied the question or of comprehending
the iniQuitics of monopoly. You look
In vain In his notification speech for any
sign Of Indignation at what the trusts
have been doing or for evidence Of zeal In
their prosecution. lie has, for several
years. been the intimate official companion
Of the President. but he has caught none
Of the fire which the President manifested
In his message Of last January.
Favors Its DETERMINATION.
Because private monopoly is indefensi-
bic and intolerable. the Democratic party
favors Its determination. II pledges itself
to the vigorous enforcement Of the Grim.
inal law against trust mAgnntes and Off.
Gals. 1t Is impossible for the Republican
party to enforce tho present criminal law
against trust officials; these officials are
intimately connected with tho Republican
party In the present campaign. Take. for
instance. the chairman Of the speakers
committee. Mr.. Dupont Of Delaware. lie
II the defendant In suit which the gov.
eminent brought and IL now prosecuting.
Mr.. Dupont IL charged with violation Of
the antitrust law. Why should he BE-
put on the executive committee and then
be given control Of the speaking part OF
the campaign?
II you talk to Republican leader
about penitentiary punishment for Offend
ers. he favors filming the corporation on
the ground that II IL impossible to con.
Wet individuals. but when you urge fines
you are told that fines are unjust to In.
nocent stockholders. We favor both fine
| and imprisonment. but we think 1t Ii bet.
ter to prevent monopolies than first to
| authorize them to prey upon the public
and then try TO punish them for doing 80.
| Mr. Taft favors control Of trusts instead
| Of determination. but after years OF ex'
pcriencc the people have learned that the
trusts control the government.
Our platform does not stop with the on.
forcement Of the law: It demands tho
| enactment Of such additional legislation
as may he necessary to make II impossible
for a private monopoly to exist In the
United States. The Democratic party
does not content itself with n definition
Of the wrong or with dcnunciation Of It.
1t proceeds to outline remedies The first
IL a law preventing n duplication of d.
rcctors among competing corporations. M
one can object to this remedy unless hr
Is In sympathy with the trusts. rather
than with the people who are victimzcd
by the trusts. There II no easier way of
sitting competition than to make one
board Of directors serve for n number of
competing corporations. II IL not neccs.
sary for corporations to enter into an
agreement for the restraint Of trade II tho
corporations can, without violating the
law, reach the same end by electing the
same directors.
License system rs a Remedy.
The second remedy IL one upon which
desire to dwell at some length. We BE-.
lleyc 1t to be simple, complete and easily
enforced remedy. As stated In the plat.
form II Is:
"A license system which will. without
abridging the right Of each State to ere,
ate corporations. or its right to rcgulat,
as It will foreign corporations doing bust
ness within Its limits, make It necessary
for a manufacturing or trading corpora,
ton engaged In interstate commerce to
take out a federal license before II shall
be permitted to control as much as % Del
cent OF the product In which It deals. III,
license to protect the public from watered
stock and to prohibit the control by such
corporation Of more than 80 per cent
of the total amount Of any product con
sumed In the United States"
II 1t Is conceded that Congress has tn,
power to prevent the shipment Of good,
from one State to another when sucl
shipment IL part Of a conspiracy agains,
trade and commerce, then the only cues
ton Is as to the means to be employed tc
prevent such shipment. The license sys
TEN presents an easy way Of reguntin.
such corporations rs need federal regua
ton. The law can prohibit the doing o,
thing and impose a penalty for the vic
lation OF the law, but experience ha,
shown that 1t Is very difficult to gather az
evidence from all sections Of the Unite,
States and prosecute great corporation
so difficult Is 1t that although the Sher
man antitrust law has been In force fol
eighteen years, no trust magnate has beer
sent to the Dpnitentiary for yiOlntin- nh,