New-York tribune., 1911-11-22
,fP T4FT 4yD THE TRTSTS

Mr.. TAFT AND THE TRUSTS.
The wide interest which attaches TO
the current discussion Of the trust queS-
tion and the attitude Of the administra-
tion thereto makes pertinent re-eXami-
nation Of the position Of President TAFT
which position he made strikingly clear
I'm his special message 10 Congress of
January 7. 1910 recommending the EN-
actment Of a federal incorporation law.
Discussing the purpose Of the Sherman
law, the President said:
We must infer that the evil aimed at
was not the mere bigness OF the enter
prise. but IL was the aggregation Of capi-
tel and plants with the express or i'm
piled intent 60 restrain interstate or for
eign commerce. or % monopolize 1t in
whole or in part
And again.
The object of the anti trust law was
TO suppress the abuses OF business Of the
kind described. II was not 70 interfere
with a great volume Of capital which,
concentrated under one organization, re-
duced the cost of production and made
its profit thereby, and took no advan-
tage of it's size by methods akin 70
duress 10 stifle competition with IT. ]
wish to make this distinction as en-
phatic as possible, because | conceive
[ that nothing could happen more destruc-
| tive 10 the prosperity Of the country
/ than the loss of that great economy I'm
production which has been and will be
erected I'm all manufacturing lines by
the employment Of large capita under
one management
fr.r1f,y a.. tbfc r,rccQcyn President II f.
defined n trust as "a combination sue
"cessful in achieving complete control
, over particular line of manufacture, ''
and. referring 10 the contention Of those
who then hoped the Supreme Court
would distinguish between good trusts
and bad trusts. the President declared
that not only did he believe such a dis
elimination impracticable, but that the
effort might involve the whole judicial
system in disaster" But with evident
fear that he might still have failed to
make clear his meaning, he added:
Through all our consideration Of this
grave question, however, we must insist
that the suppression Of competition, the
controlling Of prices and the monopoly
.
/ commerce and business are not only un-
lawful out contrary 10 the public good.
and that they must be restrained and
punished until ended.
IN the light Of Mr. Roosevelts recent
editorial on this subject there appears 10
be no essential difference between Presi-
dent Taft and his predecessor. II is only
when President Taft came TO take up the
question Of federal incorporation as a
remedy that any difference is discernible.
If the prohibition Of the antitrust
"act against combinations in restraint of
trade is 10 be effectively enforced it is
essential that the national government
shall provide for the creation Of na-
''tional corpora lions to carry on q legiti-
mate business throughout the United
States" said Mr.. Taft. as q prelude 20
his recommendation lie then considered
the three classes Of objections he be-
lieved would be raised against this
proposition. those emanating from per
sons "who believe the trusts should be
broken up and their property De.
"stroyed" from those who would regard
such Incorporation as unconstitutional,
and from those who advocated a system
OF compulsory licenses, on the ground
that the worst offenders would rot ac.
cept permissive federal incorporation.
Mr. Taft summed up his answer 10 the
first class as follows
II we would maintain our present
business supremacy, we should give 10
industrial concerns an opportunity to re-
organize and TO concentrate their legiti-
mate capital in a federal corporation
and 10 carry on their large business
within the lines Of the law.
Mr.. Taft's reply to the second Objec-
lion was largely legal, but with ref
erence 10 the objection that too great
supervisory authority would be CON
ceptrated In the hands Of the federal
government he concluded with the as