The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1914-07-01


performances" OF the 4fogressive party
in the matter Of state. ana national
legislation. and again to0euf the tariff
question:.
I'VE Progressives advocate the i'm
mediate creation Of a non-partisan
commission" he said. with power to
propose revision of the tariff rates,
schedule by schedule. treating each
case on an intelligent consideration of
its merits. divorced from favoritism
and the fostering Of special interests.
the reckless haste. the improper in
fiuences. the sectional party politics
Which characterize our present meth
DDS of tariff legislation by general law;
and remember that exactly the same
methods were pursued in aking the
present tariff law. as in making the
Payne-Aldrich law, which it super
seeded Our proposed methods would
never disorganize business by a COM
plete change in all the tariff schedules
at one time. This is the progressive
tariff program, and ask you to weigh
it side by side with the tariff record
OF Senator Penrose; tariff record as
productive Of evil as the tariff record
of any of the men he opposes
'Of the Progressive antitrust pro-
gram he said: I'VE believe in CO..
operation among tho business men,
-
ers. - 1T is evident that the prob
lem of all af1ti-tralst legislation is ef-
fectively to determinerun the one hand
what trade practices are unfair. and on
the other to prevent the exclusive con-
troll Of any factor OF group operated
asa unit. It is primarily an adminis-'
trative problem To meet It. we must
have adequate administrative ma
chinery.
Power .uf Trade Eommission.
The Progressive therefore advocate
the creation of a.etronG interstate trade
commission and would give such mis-.
sion, primarily, three powers:
First, the power of Investigation.
The commissions should be able to as
certain on complaint; or on its own
motion whether monopoly in fact
exists, and II 1t does exist. the basis
of it's monopolfstic power.
hibit ali u1fair trade practices within
its jurisdiction. This power would
enable the commission to stop ali
monopolies based sona unfair and op-
pressive trade practices. Whatever
monopoly is based on such practices,
what Is needed is not the right to
recommend that suit1 be brought, by
the attorney generaiT or by any one
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 factor necessary to
production by an order adapted to the
circumstance of the particular case
The orde: may involve changes in
organization, in management or in the
conduct Of the business Where ex-
elusive possession OF a natural re-
source is the basis of the monopoly, it
may be necessary to subject its possess
sion to the obligation OF public service,
that is, the obligation to sell to others
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
ganization. But we demand that the
government be clothed with all the
necessary power tonefush monopoly
with its attendant evilssss7 -ss-s-
The Democrat Program.
"Contrasled with this program we
have the Democratic antitrust pro-
gram now under discussion in the sem
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 al
ways will be. the states rights party,
the party opposed to strong federal
action, the 'party-afraid-o of power
I'VE cannot control our great ma
tional business without pow, r, national
power. But the Democrats dare not
use power themselves. nor let any one
else have it. Their trust program, as
it stands today, is made futile by this
fear. Their official administration
bills propose a weak federal trade
commission, with no power except to
investigate and report They fear to
give the government the strength to
cope with corporate abuses. They
fear to give the commission power to
prevent unfair trade practices. In
deed, their measure would hardly give
the commission power really to inves-
tigate, much less to destroy by proper
| administrative order, monopolies based
on the exclusive possession Of q fac
! tor essential to production. To the
| power of investigation and recon-
mendation which the bill proposes te
| give to the commission, SO far as they
go, we have no objection.
| Not Enough Power.
| 1T is the inadeQuacy of the com
missions power to destroy monopoly
which we condemn. Progressive con
| gressmen voted for the bill, not be
cause 1t represents an adequate at
tempt to deal with a great problem
but in the hope that day will arrive
when the socalled trade commission
will be given sufficient power to make
| 1t a real trade commission, such as oul
national platform promises. and sucf
as the bills as we have introduced
would provide.
1.-The house of representatives ha.
also passed a bill supplemental to the
Sherman antitrust act. Many of the
provisions of this bill deserve com.
mendation, especially those which pro.
hibit certain forms of unfair trade
i competition which the courts have moi
as yet clearly condemned, but which
upright business men everywhere
recognize as wrong and tending to mo-
nopoly. Similar provisions will be
found in the Progressive antitrust
bills.
But the Clayton bill goes hopeless
ly wrong IN that it forbids specifically
any combination or agreement in in
I terstate commerce, between any two
or more corporations, firms or ever
L Ind