The Commoner.
Oct. 10, ioa
3
THE GOOD TRUSTS AND THE BAD TRUSTS
tor-
Mr. Roosevelt and other republican leaders
have repeatedly said that thoro are good trusts
and bad trusts, but none of them have over
undertaken to point out the "good trusts."
The Minneapolis Journal, a republican paper,
in an editorial printed in its issue of September 29,
had something to say on the "good and bad
trusts" subject and explained, "Little corporations
aro good and bad, and so are big ones."
After reading this editorial, John Dunham
wrote to the Journal, asking: "Will you kindly
give me the names o half- a dozen good trusts
and half a dozen bad ones through the columns of
your paper?"
This question has been submitted to many re
publican newspapers throughout the country," but
they have invariably dodged it The Minneapolis
Journal, however, met the question in a straight
forward way. It reproduced Mr. Dunham's letter
and referred to him as being "evidently a gentle
man who prefers concrete instances to abstract
generalizations." Then the Journal bluntly ad
mitted "THIS QUESTION IS CERTAINLY A
POSER."
The Journal editorial is so remarkable, com
ing as it does from a republican newspaper, that
it is worthy cf reproduction. The Journal says:
. It is easy enough to say that big corpora
tions are good and- bad, just as little ones are.
It is quite within the realm of the probable
that a big corporation may be beneficently
managed as it is within the realm of certainty
that small corporations are managed in a
good way. L
But when it comes to picking out the good
trusts, we confess that the task is no easy
one. If the question were applied merely
to big corporations, without regard to whether
but ho is carrying out in the Philippine islands a
policy which denies the theory of self-governmenta
policy that is identical with that pur
sued by the English government in this country
prior to the American revolution..
While the rumor above referred to ought not
to have deceived any one, it was reported with
elaboration and emphasis by the republican papers
which, being unable to defend imperialism, are
Sing an excuse for avoiding it The readers
of The Commoner need not be told that the re
port was false in total, but they may be inter
ested to know that the Anti-Imperialist league has
circulated more than half a million pamphlets
and leaflets during me past year. It has sent
out nearly 120,000 copies of Senator Hoar's speech,
Sr circulated 20,000 copies of Mr. Cannock's
recent article, from which the following is quoted:
Andrew Carnegie says in the May North
; American Review: "We prohibited the read
Zing of the Declaration of Independence in the
1 Philippines last Fourth of July. To the in
credulous reader let me repeat this fact It is
on record and acknowledged by our officials.
We can imagine the first thought of so good a
man as Judge Taft, and so good an American
as he has been hitherto, when this was sug
gested to him:
" 'Is thy servant a dog that he should
do this thing?' But, alas, we did it.
"We are engaged in work which requires
suppression of American ideas hitherto held
sacred. If the republican candidate for the
presidency, even if it were President Roose
velt himself, popular as he is could be taxed
with having approved this next Fourth of July,
he would probably be defeated in the next
campaign. Were I of the democratic party, I
should base the campaign largely upon this
order, and ask the people if they wished a
president capable of suppressing the reading of
the Declaration of Independence in any part
of the world."
The league has rendered -valuable service to
the cause of free government and is not deceived
by unauthorized promises made by some of the
: subordinate officials. The republican party is re
peating on this question its policy on other public
questions. "
Mitchell Defends the Strikers.
On another page will be found a defense of
' the anthracite coal strikers and a presentation of
their cause by Mr. Mitchell, the president of the
united mine workers. His statement is a reply to
President Baer, -. ho seems to be' acting as spokes-
thoy constitute trusts, there might not bo
great difficulty in picking six good ones, but
' to find six trusts that aro good is something
that stacsers us.
The truth is, thoro is a bad side to every
trust The United States Steol corporation is
. generally regarded as a good trust in tho
sense that it does not try to crush what com
petition it has, that itjnaintains a fair prlco
for ore, that it keeps lako freights at living
rates and in that it does not practico extor
tion. As a steadying agent for the iron and
steel industry of tho United States, it per
forms a very valuable service. But when wo
reflect that J. Pierpont Morgan and associates
made $56,000,000 in financing tho trust, on an
investment of $25,000,000, and tho water in
tho capitalization is estimated at $500,000,000,
wo cannot pronounce this trust altogether
good. Tho Standard Oil company would bo
classed as a good trust by many people. It
has greatly reduced the price and improved
tho quality of illuminating oil. It is doubt
ful if tho price would bo so low as it is today
if there were a dozen competing companies.
But, viewing tho oil trust from tho stand
point of its extinct competitors, it shows up in
a bad light Its great army of hired men
have taken the places that would have been
filled, by a great many small businesses with
independent men at the head of them, and its
employes are probably worse off than they
would be with independent companies in the
field..
Every trust wo can think of has a good and
bad side. We frankly confess our inability to
pick out six good ones. Probably no two peo
ple would agree on such a group, unless they
were preferred stockholders in each of the six.
But then it is true that every forward step
in the world's history has its bad as well as ita
good side. Tho introduction of machinery Is'
generally hold to bo good, yet it has brought
tho keenest suffering to thousands and mil
lions. So far it has appeared to most people
that mere bigness of a corporation is Inevit
ably associated with badness. This may bo
merely becauso tho evils of a corporation aro
moro .Impressive In proportion as tho corpora
tion's slzo is impressive. "
But between tho trusts which almost all
tho people hold to be bad, tho acknowledged
capacity and opportunity of all trusts to work
enormous ovils and tho widespread popular
apprehension that such opportunity and ca
pacity will bo used, thoro Is abundant reason
why patriotic citizens should insist upon sorao
form of eifectivo public control of trusts. Un
restrained, they aro a menace to tho republic.
In effect,- it makes little dlfforonco whether
thoy aro good or bad. Wo do not want them
to mastor us. A perfect monarch could un
doubtedly give tho United States a far hotter
government than wo havo today, in tho sense
of superior performance of governmental func
tions, but all Americans would prefer an im
perfect republic to a porfect monarchy. This
nation Ib based upon the sovereignty of tho
people. That sovereignty is no longer In dan
ger on tho political side, but it may bo assailed
on tho industrial side.
It makes little difference to a free man in
what way his liberty is menaced. Ho will
defend himself against all encroachments.
Tho American people will not permit their lib
erties to bo curtailed by trusts any moro than
by despots.
man for the mine owners. Mr. Mitchell's argu
ment is calm, clear and convincing. He has shown
ability and good judgment in the manner in which
ho hw exposed tho half-truths relied upon by mem
bers of tho antnraclte coal trust No impartial
reader can fail to recognize tho justice of the claim
made by the strikers, and Mr. Mitchell has ren
dered his own people a great service in thus bring
ing the facts to tho attention of the public.
Mr. Mitchell rightly declares that tho fight is
a3 much for tho next generation as for the miners
themselves, and every lover of his country must
sympathize with tho miners in their effort to pro
tect the rising generation from a toil that not
only stunts their bodies, but deprives them of that
opportunity for intellectual improvement which is
the birthright of every American citizen.
JJJ
A Difficult Task.
The Kansas City Journal insists that "the
trust question Is undeveloped," and says that "the
logic is that the question should be taken out of
politics." It will be difficult for tho Journal to
convince the consumers of the country that the
trust question is undeveloped. Every time a man
looks into his coal bin, every time he goes to the
grocery store or the butcher shop, he is confronted
by the trust question In a thoroughly developed
condition. No wonder the representatives of a
party which derives its campaign funds from the
trusts and under whose administration trusts havo
multiplied and thrived should plead that the ques
tion be taken out of politics.
JJJ
Force Them to Answer.
A candidate for congress should be willing to
answer any question concerning his position on
public questions. The congressional candidate
who is not willing to take the people into his
confidence is unworthy of the confidence of tho
people. A bill known as "The Fowler Currency
Bill" has been introduced into the house of rep
resentatives and recommended for passage by
the republican majority of the committee on
banking and currency. This bill provides for tho
establishment of branch banks, for a bank cur
rency based on the assets of the bank and for
making the silver dollar redeemable in gold at the
demand of the holder of the silver.
An asset currency is but a new phase of the
old "wildcat currency" and the branch bank sys
tem but another phase of the old United States
bank. The branch bank scheme is nothing moro
nor less than an attempt to organize a great bank
ing trust with headquarters in New York with
branches In all parts of tho country. Tho bill
has tho indorsement of the republican majority
of tho house committee on banking and currency
and is advocated by leading republicans.
'EVery candidate for congress should bo will
ing to tell whether he favors or opposes tho Fowler
currency bill. The candidate who says he has not
studied the bill is incompetent to fill the office to
which ho aspires. '
The question, "Do . you favor enacting Into
law the Fowler currency bill?" should be put to
every republican candidate for congress. Let dem
ocratic' newspapers and populist newspapers carry
the following at the head of their editorial col
umns; addressed to the republican candidate in
their particular districts:
"Mr. , do you favor enacting Into law
the Fowler currency bill?"
The man who Insists that the money question
is dead has not read and digested the Fowler bill.
The congressional aspirant who is not willing to
go on record for or against that bill is unworthy
of confidence and should not receive the support
of thinking men.
JJJ
What Now?
Several weeks ago the Chicago Record-Herald
called upon the national leaders of the republican
party to "think carefully over tho situation." This
republican paper said that the action of tho re
publican convention of Iowa was "as clearly pro
phetic as anything merely human can be." Tho
Record-Herald added:
On the one hand there are the democrats,
who are nearly united in tho demand for tar
iff revision and for the denial of a tariff for tho
benefit of monopoly. On the other are those
western republicans who are equally insistent
on the same points, thdugh their method of
revision would not bo so drastic. Now if "no
revision" should be the continuing decree of a
republican congress under a republican admin
istration, how will tho sentiment for revision
that has been cultlv-ted In both parties work
out? Manifestly, through republican defec
tions to a dor ocratic success. The demands
of western republicans must bo recognized and
granted as a condition essential to the suprem
acy of that party.
Now that the national leaders of the party
have concluded to reject the demands of the west-'
era republicans, what will the Record-Herald say?
Will there be "republican defections to a demo
' cratic success?"
Will that refusal destroy the supfemacy of the
republican party? .
-'