Mrs. Grundy. (Tracy City, Tenn.) 1903-1930, 1914-07-23

vision of the tariff rates, schedule by
schedule, treating each case on an In
telligent consideration of its merits,
divorced from favoritism and the fos-
tering of special interests.
Let us turn now to the Progressive
antitrust program. We believe In
cooperation among business men,
among farmers and among wage
workers. Our program is based on
the fundamental proposition that the
State should regard private monopo'
listic power as contrary to public wei
fare, but that it should never attack
a particular business organization
merely because Of it's size. In many
lines of industry the unit OF social
and economic efficiency in our time
is large unit. What we want is
business machinery strong and eff
cient enough to do our business work,
to supply we'll and cheaply the daily
needs of 90,000,000 people. We want
that machinery run honestly, fairly
and without monopoly. In short, we
want business power ample to serve
us, and we do not want that power
abused. We want the control of cor
porations to be exercised effectively
and promptly, so as to get results We
should end once and for all the at
tempt to regulate business by SER
les of lawsuits. We wish to put a
stop to the misdeeds of business
men who do wrong. We wish also to
put a stop to the marrying and perse-
cution of honest business men who do
right.
The Progressives therefore advo-
cate the creation of a strong Inter-
state Trade Commission and would
give such Commission, primarily,
three powers:
First, the, power of investigation.
The Commission should be able to as
certain on complaint or on Its own
motion, whether monopoly in fact
exists, and If It does exist, the basis
of It's monopoIistic power.
Second, the power directly to pro-
hiblt all unfair trade practices within
it's Jurisdiction. This power would
enable the Commission to stop all
monopolies based on unfair and oP-
pressive trade practices. Whenever
monopoly is based on such practices,
what is needed is not the right to rec
ommend that suits be brought by the
Attorney-GeneraI, or by anyone else.
What is needed is the direct power In
the Commission itself to stop the
wrong.
Third, the power to end the exclu.
sive control of a factor necessary to
production by an order adapted to the
circumstances of the particular case.
The order may involve changes in or
ganization, in management, or in the
conduct of the business. Where OK
elusive possession Of natural re-
source is the basis of the monopoly,
II may be necessary to subject its pos
session to the obligation of public
service, that Is, the obligation to sell
to others a reasonable amount at
reasonable rates.
Our constructive program of anti
trust legislation 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 clothed with all the
necessary power to crush monopoly
with all its attendant evils.
Contrasted with this program we
have the Democratic antitrust pro-
gram now under discussion in the
| Senate of the United States. That
| program 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-afraid-of-
| Power"
We cannot control our great Ma
tional businesses without power, Ma
| tional power. But the Democrats dare
not use power themselves, nor let any.
| one else have it. Their trust pro-
gram, as it stands today, is made fu-
tile by this fear Their official admin
istration bills propose weak Federal
Trade Commission, with no power ex.
cept to investigate and report. They
fear to give the government the
strength to cope with corporate abus.
es. They fear to give the Commits
sion power to prevent unfair trade
practices. Indeed, their measure
would hardly give the Commission
power really to investigate, much less
to destroy by proper administrative
order, monopolies based on the exclu-
sive possession of factor essential
to production. To the powers of in
vestigation and recommendation which
the bill proposes to give to the Com
mission, so far as they go, we have
| no objection. 1t is the inadequacy of
| the Commissions power to destroy
| monopoly which we condemn.
But the Clayton Bill goes hopeless.
| ly wrong in that 1t forbids specif.
cally any combination, or agreement
in interstate commerce, between any
two or more corporations, firms or
even individuals, which in any way
| lessons or restricts the competition
between them. This is the hub OF
their whole position. They propose
Il IN 20 1,