The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1908-09-30
JOURNEY|NG IN
LAND Of DREAMS
lmpracticable 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.l

y
speech
When we consider remedies that are
proposed for the trusts, we find our
selves touEleying in land Of dreams.
Again the magician of 1896 waves his
wand At stroke difficulties disap-
pear and the complex problems of mod
ern business are forgotten in the fas-
eination of the simple panacea. And,
as the free coinage of silver in the
ratio OF 16 to l 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-
lusion Of 1908 is comparable only to
that of twelve years ago
The first suggestion is that the law
should prevent duplication of d.
However advisable it may be to have
independent directorates of competing
corporations, 1t would seem still more
important to have Independent stock
holders, for majority of the stock
holders of q corporation choose the di
feCtOfS. IL INV We're IGtSSeu pre-
venting the duplication of directors it
would easily be evaded in the selection
of men who would represent the same
interests The most ordinary eXper-
fence shows that 1t 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, 1t hardly rises to the dignity Of
remedy" or vindicates its title to a
place in an imposing scheme of reform
outlined In a national platform.
But the more important proposal is
''that any manufacturing or trading
corporation engaged in interstate COM
MERGE shall be required to take out a
federal license before 1t shall be per-
mitted to control as much as % per
cent Of the product In which 1t 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
troll by any such corporation "of more
than so 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 amy product
consumed in the United States" Does
1t refer to a class of commodities?
And, If so, how shall the classes be de-
fined? Or does it refer to each sepn-
rate article of commerce? And, If so,
what account does this proposal take
of the Skill and initiative of nanufac-
turers who have built up more or
less exclusive trade in particular ar
.ticles, often protected by trade marks,
although in most active competition
with other articles designed for the
| same general purpose and seeking the
| same market? In 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.. Bryan's proposal, to what pc
riod of production is the prohibition
to apply? Is the excess for a day on
for month to be considered? Or is
the average production for a year TO be
takeny 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
so that the manufacturer may know
when he Is about to exceed the pre-
scribed ratio! Ne may justly be re
CURED to govern his own conduct, bu
how shall he be appraised of the con
duct OF others upon which Is to depent
his guilt or innocence?
The patent laws confer tru,
monopoly III the exclusive right to man
ufacture and sell. Are these laws t,
}; be repealed because a private mon
spoly is indefensible and intolera Bile p
Brysn'. Crude Reasoning.
Il An example OF Mr.. Bryan's reason
Ing Is found in his statement tina
, when corporation controls 80 pe
cent OF the total product II supple
forty millions of people with that prod
rct' There are, OF course, specialize
which have limited market and ar
used By a relatively small number o
the people Of the United States. Nor,
than 80 per cent, and indeed even a.
much as 100 per cent Of the trade !,
such articles may be In tho contro
Of particular corporation. This NAV
in fact, be relatively a small corpora
ton. II may never have aspirpd to tn
unsnvory renown Of trust" But b
prosecuting It's particular line wit,
fidelity and meeting satisfactorily
limited want; or by reason of som
secret proeseses or advantage Of expert
! cnee It may control the trade In a Civ
q s1tfe4s 81 commerce. Or, suppose
c0nssfn sontrofs the whole trade Il
ssHs ssvfH byproduct which 1t ha