Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-04-16

1.-THE country Is ~honeycOmed witt
these pools, trade agreements AM
gentlemen's understandings 81 under
cover Of selling agencies, trade asso'
Citations, social clubs, information bI
reaus and innnmerable other dis
guises. Every now and then the gov
eminent pOnnces upon some nnfortu'
nate industry, like the members oi
the wire. window glass, %turpentine
bath,tnb, straWbOard, wood pulp and
wrapping paper pools, in a spasmOdic
and %haphazard fashion, selecting Its
victims at random, collects fines
from the little fellows and sometime.
generally unsuccessfully-tries to
send them to jail-only to find them
getting together again after the
storm has blown over, but in a more
elusive form as the result of their
expensive, and uncomfortable exper'
fence.
''"This anomalous condition of in.
subordination and defiance of law by
our. men of affairs whom We look up
as constituting II best and most en-
terprising citizenship is the inevita'
BILE outcome of an unsOund and des'
tructive economic policy, from the er.
fects of which the farmers by reason
Of their vast political power, are
seeking TO exempt themselves whilst
imposing that policy upon the rest
of the country. d.
"The only possible excuse for sucn
q position on the part of the farme,
is that he, as the most valuable and
the greatest wealth-producing ana
least.protected element in IL indus,
trial life, is entitled to exemptions
and immanities at the expense of the
rest of the community.
There is no basic principle upon
which any such exemption or discrim
nation can be justified. Why should
the cotton-growers be suffered to
combine in the marketing of their pr.
duct 50 as to regulate the price and
OUTPUT, whilst that right is denied to
the manufacturers of cotton goods:
Or why should not the coal operators
have the same privilege?
what, then, should the farmers In
all fairness do in the circumstances:
Should all arrangements and devices
for regulating prices and output be-
tween competitors, including those ap
plying to their own business, be for
hidden? Or should they all be per.
mitted? If the latter should such per.
mission be within given Limitations
and what should they be? The ana.
wers. to these questions point the
only just way of approaching this
problem. 81. ,
"The- discussion of this question in
wolves only the various forms of tenn.
porary agreements and understand.
ings between actual or potential com
petitors in a given industry, havins
for their purpose uniformity Q,
price or regulation Of output whether
expressed through pools, selling
agencies or otherwise. They are no,
usually in corporate form or repre-.
scented by capital stock.
"The proposal does not include any
change in the existing program fol
dealing with the trusts and cOmbins.
tiOns that are in corporate form n
with which the government and the
courts have been mainly cOncerneo,
except to render their, prosecution and
dissolution more effective.
There are many reasons why the
arguments for the suppression ano
determination of these trusts SHOULD
not apply to the pools. agreements.
understandings and price.fxings anu
Misunderstanding devices, provided
the latter are placed under rigid GOV
eminent regulation and restriction as
to the terms and conditions of the
agreement so as to effectively pro.
tect the; public against all danger %
eXtortiOn or oppression. s'a |#>'
81. The latter do not involve stock
watering, exploiting the investing
public, change or ownership Or clos
ing of mills or. factories. "
%. There is not the same power
or incentive to exact exOrbitant prices
no excessive dividends are required
to be earned on innated capital to be
used as a basis for unloading stocks
at exaggerated prices, and there is
the constant peril of inviting new
competition and thus disrupting tho
agreement.
49, The element of individuality is
preserved; there is no permanency to
the, arrangement; each of the parties
must continue to maintain his plan:
and selling force in condition to re.
sumo competition at any moment. He
must accordingly avail himself of all
new inventions. 2
"a. There is a continuing compets.
ton in costs of production between
the parties to the arrangement result,
ing in economy of manufacture ana
distribution and of general manage
ment, since each party secures tho
sole benefit of such economies.
IS. There, Is not the inducement o.
opportunity for the acts of oppression
that are practiced by the trusts in
order to maintain their supremacy.
The interests of the latter are G
manently and indestructibly merged
whilst under these temporary ar.
engagements such acts of OPPRESSION
are dangerous and unlikely. Thc
friendly c~o-operators of today may be
the bitter competitors of tomorrow.
IS. They offer a means of escap.
from destructive competition without
driving competitors to combination
with all its attendant evils.
these arrangements should be no,
however, longer tolerated in their
present furtive unlawful form. whetll.
er they apply to the product of the
farmer the manufacturer or the mid.
dleman. They are a standing invita-.