The Bourbon news. [volume] (Paris, Ky.) 1895-19??, 1908-05-05
Secretary Taft on Trusts.

secretary ldIl Is Idpiuiy disclosing
his ignorance on the trust question, F;
for to believe him ignorant is more
charitable than to believe that he does
not intend to interfere with the trusts,
although his language would justify
even this belief, says the Commoner.
He takes Mr.. Bryan to task for favor
ing the DETERMINATION of trusts, and
says that to eXterminate trusts would
be to exterminate industry. The sec
rotary desires to regulate and control
the trusts. But has his party not been
regulating" and controlling" for
some eleven years now? And have we
not more now than we had when the
regulating and controlling began? The
trust family is family big enough to
satisfy the Presidents ideas of the
size of family, and the birth rate is
greater than the death rate. The adj
ministration has commenced suit
against few trusts, but not against
many, and the trusts are still gentle
hand of the administration. What has
been done in regard to the steel trust?
Did it not swallow up the Tennessee
Coal and Iron Company? And was it
not given out that the swallowing was
done after the administration had been
consulted? Is the street trust fighting
! Cooroto ,xy Taft9 ordi r,ho+ ob0,,t Az
International Harvester Company?
Have the farmers secured any relief
yet? And what about the paper trust?
The steel trust has something like
billion dollars of water in its stock it
can afford to contribute ten millions to
the Republican campaign fund, be-
cause it can get back many times
that out of Republican victory, and
this is only one trust out of the many.
How can the pepole hope to regulate or
control trusts when the trusts, b. the
election of their favorite to office, are
able to control the government? The
determination of trusts is not the ex-
stance, single corporation has a
monopoly of the production of a neces-
sary of life, and has ten factories in
different states for the production of
this particular article, the extermina-
ton of this trust would mean the sell !
ing Of enough factories to reduce the |
production of this one corporation to a |
point where it would not longer have a
monopoly. But this would not mean
closing up of the factories to reduce
the production of this one corporation |
to a point where it would not longer |
have a monopoly. But this would not
mean closing up of the factories. The |
people would still need the article and |
the article would still have to be pro
duced. But the independent factories :
coming into competition with the orig |
inal corporation-now no longer a |
monopoly-would reduce the price of
the article, and the people at large
would get the benefit of the reduction. |
With reduction in price, the people
could buy more of the article produced.
and this would increase the demand
for labor, and new factories would
spring up or existing factories would
be enlarged. With Il number of fac
tories competing for laDOrers, the
iaborer's chance of employment would
be better, and his wages would be
higher. Then, too, with number of
factories competing for raw material,
the price of raw material would IL
crease. In other words, the extermin-
alton of the trust, instead OF destroy
ing business. would restore business to
healthy condition, while it reduced
the price of the product. increased the
price of raw material, and improved
the condition of the laboring man.
Competition is the natural condition,
and the determination of the trust
would restore competition. Monopoly
is an unnatural condition, and the Re-
publican party has fosrered monopoly
and thus built industry upon false
basis to the detriment of all of the
parties concerned except the. monopo-
list, and he mas been demoralized by
his unearned wealth while the rest of
the people have been victimized by the
practice of monopoly.
Secretary Taft ought to study the
trust question little more. or discuss
it less. for each speech reveals his
lack of familiarity with the. subject or
his lack of sympathy with the people