Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1912-10-30
THE TRUSTS AND THE TARIFF

It has been so much dinned int
the peoples ears that tariff produce!
and fosters trusts that our Demo
cratic friends claim to believe it ant
many Republicans fear it is true;
and yet there never was a statement
which could be so conclusively con.
troyerted nor an argument whose
fallacy could be so convincingly ex
posed.
There are more trusts in free trade
England than there are in protected
America.
That one statement ought to be
enough to settle che question.
There are more trusts in America
in articles upon the free list than
there are in those upon the dutiable
list.
That is another statement which
ought TO settle the matter.
If the tariff is the mother of trusts,
how are We to account for trusts in
England, where the tariff is for rev.
enue only?
II the tariff is the mother of trusts
how are We TO account for the coffee
trust, for the Standard Oil trust and
for innumerable other trusts in this
country in articles which are on the
free list?
But if the facts prove that trusts
can exist independently of the tariff,
ordinary reason and common sense
demonstrate that to reduce the tariff
or remove it entirely, can not posi-
bly, eliminate the trusts. The only
purpose of a reduction of duty on a
given article is to introduce foreign
competition and compel its sale at a
lower price. Consider the steel in
dustry for example: The steel trust
controls little more than half of
the business of this country The re-
mainder of it, nearly 60 per cent, is
in the hands of small independent
SouCCih no. ~ 10 Univ duuliItcu
that the gigantic trust by reason OF
its ownership of iron mines, rail-
roads, shipping lines and enormous
plants, can produce cheaper than any
of its smaller competitors. 1t is the
competitors of the steel trust, there
fore, who would first be put out of
business by the reduction of the price
of the goods they manufacture, If
the cutting still went on, to an ex-
tent that even the trusts could not
manufacture at profit, the result
would simply be to transfer the busi-
ness to foreign mills, involving the
less of employment in this country
TO a million men or more, together
with the universal disaster which
would follow the shutting down of
one of the country's greatest indus.
tries. But even then we would not
be rid of the steel trust, we would
simply be dealing with foreign or
ganization instead OF one that is
subject to our own laws and regula-
tions. And similar demonstration
might be made in the matter of any
other industry which is depending
upon the tariff for its prosperity. 1t
is the small independent factories
that would go to the wall first, leav-
ing the great trusts in possession of
the market and therefore in position
to advance its prices to any figure
that it thought the business would
bear.
Neither by facts nor by arguments,
therefore, can it be shown that the
tariff is in any way responsible for
the trusts or that its removal would
eliminate trusts. The trust problem
has to be solved through the enact
ment and enforcement of laws pro-
viding for that degree of regulation
which will ensure competition and
prevent monopoly, and not through
the destruction of a revenue system
under which this country has enjoy
ed a period of prosperity unmatched
in it's history.
n