The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-11-18
ROOSEVELT ON COMBINES,

There is in Col. Roosevelt IS article in
the Outlook as wired, "a suggestion that
is cmincutly worthy Of consideration.
His argument with respect to the Steel
Trust is not Of much value. and partic.
ularly is his attempt 10 explain his
connection with the purchase of the
Tennessee Coal e Iron Company by the
trust lamcntably weak.
Bnt where he calls attention fo the
futllltv of prosecutions and the impos
slbIlity of reaching results presumably
aimed mt, through such prosecutions as
arc on, ne strikes Il note that is
worthy OF the deepest consideration.
We have seen that, while the govern
ment WINS the legal battle, it practical.
~ loses all the points at issue. This
Is true in the Standard Oil case. where,
although the big holding company is
dissolved. the minor corporations which
1T controlled arc still left untouched.
with the same old management for all
IN the same old hands That is to saw.
those who controlled the big holding
company control all the minor compan-
ics whose stock was held by The big
concern in its merged form.
The same is true of the Tobacco
Trust. The big holding trust is or.
dcrcd dissolved; but the control of
the minor companies, most of these
themselves combines of smaller CON
Germs. still remains with the same old
management as TO all that was CON.
blned in the big trust before the order
for dissolution. These several trusts
being owned by the same old stock
holders and controlled in the same old
interests viii. of course. work topeth
or. each controlling It's apportioned part
Of tho tobacco business. the result be.
ing 10 form in effect four monopoIics
where heretofore there has been but
one.
The thought suggested bv Col. Roaso.
Welt S article is how far the dissolu.
tions of trusts can be pursued, since
the dissolution of the main trusts proves
useless as shown. There is no way TO
detach the ownership of the stock in
the big concern from the hands that
have held It heretofore The right of
ownership is not in the least attacked
by reason of the suits, nor can stock be
coniiscatcd, and the control of the oil
business IN the one ease. and of the
tobacco business in tho other by the
same old managers. remains precisely
as before
The question is. then. whether the
government will proceed. or can pro.
coed. to the breaking up of these smaller
corporations which. in ther@selvcs. hv
their combination. are Just as complete
monopolles rs controlled the trade be-
fore. This further dissolution has not
been proposed; perhaps il could not be
made effective. But, at any rate. the
government suits, successful as they
have been, arc failures practically 10
throw off the monopolics in oil and to-
baeco. These mouopoics remain. not
IN the form in which they have been
heretofore. but practically. aud To all
intents and purposes. they remain the
same monopoIies in the same hands.
And. since the government shows n.
disposition 10 pursue tho matter furt he,
and 10 break M the minor monopolies
which have heretofore becu combined
IN the one great monopoly in each case
il IS evident that nothing practical ha-
been gained. There is no reduction in
prices, no change OF interests. The
control Of tho business j. Just as rigid
as ever. and whatever profits result
from that coutrol 20 into the sam,
! pockets rs before.
Col. Roosevelt noting the futilitv OF
these adiudications a. practical pro
position, suggests instead the admins
tration OF these monopoles bv the gov
crnment itself. This j. practically IN,
SAME thing that was suggested by Judge
Gary aud Judge Frick some time bacl
as TO steel; but these corporations be
ing State affairs and not National, il
would seem impossible TO do, unde