Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-07-02
sive trade practices. Whatever mon
II 6assd on such practices. what

session to the obligation of public
service. that Is, the obligation to sell
to others reasonable amount at
reas0nable rates.
A Constructive.
Our constructive program Of anti
trust legfslatiOn has no quarrel with
large business organizations as such.
On the contrary, we recognize that
business efficiency in production can
be attained only through business or
%ganization. But we demand that the
government be clother with all the
necessary power to crush monopoly
with its attendant evils.
Democracy is Inadequate.
"C0nstrasted with this program we
have the Democrats antitrust prog
ram now under discussion In the sen
ate Of the United States. That pro-;
gram proves the inadequacy of the
Democratic party for the present and.
the future Of the nation. 1t Is, and
always will be, the States Rights
party, the party opposed to strong
federal action, the 'party-afraidof-
power sts9tas
Needs National Control.
I'VE cannot control our great ma
tional business without power, ma
tional power. Eut the Democrats
dare not use power themselves, MOI.
let any m else have it. Their trust
program as it stands today, is made
futile by this fear. Their official ad-s
ministrati0n bills propose a weak fed.
eral trade; commission, with no power.
except to Investigate and report. They
fear to give the government the,
government the strength to cope with
corporate abuses. They fear to give
the commission power to prevent un.
fair trade practices. Indeed, their,
measure would hardly give the com
mission power; really to investigate,
much less to destroy by proper ad-
ministrative order, monOp0lies based
on the exclusive possession of q fac
tor essential to production. To the,
powers Of investigation and recon-
mendatf0n which the bill proposes to
give to the commission, SO far as they
so, We, have nc objection. It Is the
inadequacy Of the commissions pow
er to destroy monopoly which we con-
denim. Progressive congressman vOtt
ed for the bill, not because it repre-
SCENTS an adequate attempt to deal
with . great problem, but in the hope
that q day will arrive when the So
called trade commission will be given
sufficient power to make it q real
trade commission, such as our ma
ti0nal platform promises, and. such as
1 ,ee 9i|,s Z sss have introduced would
t Supplemental Biil.i
The Hose Of Representatives has
also passed a bill supplemental to the
Sherman antitrust act. Many Of the
proviSi0ns Of this bill deserve com,
ImendatiOn, especially those which.
prohibit certain forms Of unfair trade
IcOmpetiti0n which the courts have
not as yet clearly condemned, but.
which upright business men every
where recognize as wrong and tend
ing to- monopoly. Similar provisions
Twill be found In the Progressive anti
trust bills. ;ae@S
Clayton Dill 10 Wrong.
"But the Clayton bill goes hopeless.
ly wrong in that 1t for5ids specifically
any combination or agreement in In
ter-state commerce. between any two.
corporations, firms. or even indiyi-..
dtals. which In any way lessons or re-
~stricts the competition between them,
This is the hub Of their. whole post
tion. They propose that two farmers
selling milk across a state limo can,
not cooperate: and that twom en- do
Ing any business across a state line,
cannot form q partnership or q cor
poration. They insist that there.
must be no big business power, con-
centrated power, or large enterprise.
anywhere, and that our business must
go back to the period of not merely
1850, but 1850; to the cObbler's bench,
the grist mill and the blacksmith
forge.
An Economic Absurdity.
This is economic absurdity
Unlimited competition has proved one.
of the greate1t curses OF modern CIV
ilization. 1t was unlimited competi.
tion which created the great trusts,
EXACTLY as it created the sweatshop
and Is chiefly responsible for child
labor. The New Freedom is merely
the exceedingly old freedom which
permits each man to cut his neigh
Ab0r's throat.
THE Progressive plan, on the 9TH
Ter hand" said COl. Roosevelt, "Will
allow business concentration in 20 far.
as such concentration gives social and
economic efficiency and good service.
Eut it will also give the government
full power to, see that business CON
centration does serve these necessary
ends, and that tits not used for un-
fair competition. ,Or for monopoly or
for the unfair treatment OF labor or
for any other. anti-s0cial end. /,
The, Only Way.
This is the only tenable position
on the trust problem for IT faces the
facts and does not try to turn back
the hands of the clock. By long and
disappointing experience, we have
had several facts hammered into us.
First we cannot, and do not want
to destroy all corporations; we must
have large units to do our work.
Second, we cannot make every
man compete with every other man;
we cannot go back to 1850, still less
to 1850.
Third, we cannot destroy mono,
poly by attacking all forms Of con.
centration, whether mon0polistic or
not. .Sss Il.
Fourth, We cannot destroy real
monopoly by. attacking its legal form.
Wo ~,,c% eta Ia AuA fnkn ow,o1, Tho