Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1916-10-13

Mr.. Hughes devoted much of his at
tention to the protective tariff and to
what he termed the new slavery"
He said:
I'VE have heard much of the new
freedom. 1t seems to have a sur
prising and deplorable range. 1t has
meant freedom to sacrifice the prin-
ciples Of the merit system which our
opponents pledged themselves to en-
force. Thousands OF offices have
been created with the provision that
they might be filled without reference
to the requirements of the Civil Serv-
ice act.
1t has meant freedom to embark
the government in novel enterprises
in competition with private business
as In the case of the government Ship
ping bill 1t has meant freedom to
depart from the principles of interna-
tional law to conduct personal
diplomacy to satisfy personal vim
dictiveness.
1T has meant freedom to wage war,
not to protect American rights, but
to dislodge n disliked ruler and to
leave our citizens and their property
to anarchy and revolution,
Government by Holdup
1T has meant freedom to depart
from our time-honored policy of pro-
tecting American citizens who take
American enterprise abroad and to
substitute new policy which treats
them as adventures whose flag is no
longer a symbol of protection Of their
just rights.
TT means freedom TO subvert the
principles of government by yield
ing its authority to the demands of
force. In this last phase, instead of
the new freedom, we have the new
slavery. What are the characteristics
of this new slavery? It is the use of
the forms of free institutions to
tryanniZe over the public; to impose
demands without inquiry as to their
justice.
THE new slavery Is government by
holdup. 1t is terrorized government,
or the rule of politics assuming terror
as an excuse for submission. The
Executive is chosen to defend the
citadel of constitutional government
Instead, he surrenders 1t. Where shall
this stop2
These innovations are serious
blows to American business. But it
is said that the administration has
aided business, and strangely enough
it refers to the ANTITRUST act. 1t is
said that these laws stood in need of
definition; that men spoke of them as
of shackles and the administration
seems to wish to create the impress
sion that it has unshackled business.
"A most extraordinary claim! They
say that they nave supplied the needed
definition They have done nothing
of the sort. They have added a vague
phrase to the law, the phrase unfair
competition The content of this they
have not defined. No phrase more in
definite was ever put into a statute.
Usually words are used in a
statute with some reference to their
meaning in the law. But the phrase
unfair competition was evidently not
used in it's ordinary legal sense. That
refers to the palming off or one mans
goods as those of another through mis-
leading descriptions, labels. cartons
and the like. There were and are
abundant remedies for that sort of
thing, as every well-informed mer-
chant knows.
This phrase as used in the new law
was evidently intended to have wider
meaning than that What is its mean
ing? No lawyer knows. 1t will have
to be worked out through years of
litigation and by the decisions of the
courts, for the Federa< Trade Com
mission cannot settle the legal mean
ing of the statute which confers its
authority.
yet the administration compla-
Gently speaks of aiding business by
defining the evils aimed at by the
Antitrust acts.
mot only does the Federal Trade
Commission act not define what it
means by unfair competition, but it
leaves the Antitrust act in full effect
as before"