A
The Commoner,
3
MAY Hi 1007
'
&-.
m
legislation would be In the Interest of Innocent
stockholders.
Where two competing companies are brought
together under the same board of directors, com
petition is as effectively stifled as if there were -ari
iron-clad agreement between the two or the'
two were merged into one. If there is to bo a
determined effort to suppress the trusts and re
store competition among individual producers. It
is Imperatively necessary that rival companies
shall be prohibited from filling their boards of di
rectors with the same men. While the states
should protect the public in this respect It is not
npcessary that the people of the whole country
should be at the mercy of a few trust-creating
states, for the power of congress over interstate
commorce is ample to provide a remedy.
The third form in which Uie trust appears
is found in the combination of a number of sep
arate corporations under a contract which controls
the various parties to the contract and prevents
them from entering into competition with eacli
other. Tills is the trust at wliich the provisions of
the anti-trust law were aimed, and It deserves less
attention now lhan in the years past, because, oe
ing the most familiar form of the trust, It Is most
likely to be exterminated. All that need to bo
said is as to the remedy. In the beginning the ex
ecutive officers thought the civil part of the stat
utes sufficient and attempted to break up the trusts
by injunction. That pro'vlug unsatisfactory, re
sort was next had to the criminal provisions of
the law with the idea that a fine would be suffi
cient. The fine has been shown to be ineffective
and the president is turning more and more to
ward the imprisonment clause. It is useless to
attempt to prevent combinations by fines levied
against corporations when the fines are small com
pared with the sums made by combination. Im
prisonment, however, Is a real punishment and
the trust magnates will become scarce as soon as
the penitentiary doors close upon a few of the
large offenders.
The fourth form which the trust assumes if;
the single corporation which buys up enough fac
tories to give it control of a given business. This
is the form .which the future trust is most likely
to assume and it is the most difficult one to reach
The tendency at this time Is toward consolidation
under a single corporation. The United States
Steel company is one of the best 'Illustrations that
,we have -of this kind of a trust. It is a single
corporation with a single board of directors, but
It owns enough factories to .enable it to control -several
different branches of industry. It has re
cently acquired from the Great Northern railroad
iron ore beds of enormous value. There is scarce
ly an argument that can be made against a trust
,which can not be made against the United States
Steel company, and yet no effort has been made
to interfere with Its plans. It is doubtful whether
any law-that we now have is sufficient to reach
the case of the steel company and similar trusts
operating under a single charter, but it Is absurd
to denounce a contract betvye6n several different
corporations and then consent to the consolidation
of the parties to the contract into one corporation
more potent for. evil than the separate ones could
possibly be.
Every argument that can be made against the
principle involved In any other form of trust can .
be made against the single corporation which se
cures a controlling Influence over any line of busi
ness, and no time should be lost in attacking the
single corporation trust.
Is a, private monopoly desirable? From the
'efforts that have been made to resist the prin
ciple when It has appeared in the guise of a com
bination in restraint of trade it would seem un
necessary to present an argument against the
private monopoly, and yet there are many who
draw a line between the monopoly created by
contract and the monopoly created by consoli
dation. "A private monopoly is indefensible and in
tolerable" so says the democratic national plat
form of 1Q0O and this Is the only tenable ground
.that the' opponent of the trust can occupy. The
moment one begins to defpnd the principle of pri
.vafe monopoly in any form he is lost. The mo
ment he expresses n willingness to tolerate the
principle of private monopoly in any form he
takes' his place in the ranks of the trust defend
ers. If the trusts are to be overthrown the oppo
nents of the system must have downright earnests
ness as well as upright intentions.
Who will defend a private monopoly? Can a
'judge be trusted to sit in a case in which he has
.a pecuniary interest? No one would think of an-
. swerlng the question in the affirmative. Why?
Because the bias of the human mind is universally
recognized. No judge is fair-minded enough to
decide a case when he is one of the parties to the
suit. It is a settled rule of court to excuse a juror
jwho has a pecuniary interest in the result of the
uit, although he Is but one In twelve. The pri
vate monopoly Is vicious In principle because thoie
who act for the monopoly are judge and jury and
decide each day against the public and in favor
of themselves. Until human nature is so purged
of Its dross that one's pecuniary interest will no
longer influence his judgment, we dare not leave
the public at tho mercy of those who establish ,k '
gain control of private monopolies.
oooo
EASILY ANSWERED
'The Washington Post is guilty of an inex
cusable blunder in the discussion of tho initiative
and referendum. It says:
"If all the power, subtlety and craft of tho
human mind should conspiro to invent a, scheme
by which to work destruction to tho plan of
dual government that has existed in this re
public for more than a century, tho initiative
and referendum would bo Invoked. Nothing
could be moro effectual and nothing could bo
so insidious. Government by constitutional con
struction would do tho work like a meat axe;
tho initiative and referendum would operate as
the poisoned draught, and thus we may choose
the block or the cup as the instrument of po
litical death. Both are completo consolidation
Both would totally extirpate state sovereignty.
The dual form would be spared by constitu
tional construction, but it would bo only the
shado-vy. Even the shadow would cease to re
mind us of departed liberty under tho irrespon
sible despotism of the initiative and referendum.
In the constitution it is writ that Now York and
Delaware are equal in tho United States senate.
Under the initiative and referendum Delaware
and Albany county, New York, would be equal,
the county, with 44,478 votes, having a slight
advantage over Delaware, with 43,878 votes.
The entire state of New York has 1,617,770
votes, and thus under the fad of tho initiative
and referendum Now York would have more
than thirty-nine times the weight in the gov
ernment that Delaware would have. Pennsyl
vania and Virginia are equal in the federal
senate, but under the initiative and referendum
Pennsylvania would swallow up half a dozen
Virginias. Ohio would equal four 'Or five Ten
nessees, and Illinois would overshadow nineteen
Mississippis. Could anybody conceive a scheme
more effectual to consolidate political power in
the great and populous states? In 1904 the
four states of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and
Illinois cast 4,935,000 votes. The other states
of tho union forty-one in number cast 8,588,
518 votes. As the constitution is, New York, .
Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois constitute four
forty-fifths of the republic in the federal sen
ate; under tho initiative and referendum they
would be moro than one-third of the union.
Where would the south stand? She would be
as powerless in the grasp of the masses of the
north as she was under the bayonets 'of recon
struction. Will the intelligence of America sub
mit to the slums of our great cities for review
the statesmanship that results from tho doliber--atlons
of the representatives of the people? Is
that to be an issue?"
The editor of the Post ought to know that,
according to the constitution, the equal repre
sentation of the states in the senate can not
be changed without the consent of tho states,
and that means that it can never be changed.
There is no danger, therefore, of the smad
states losing their influence. If the editor of
the" Post had taken occasion to inform himself
before writing the, editorial above quoted, he
would know that the advocates,, of the initiative
and referendum have never thought of depriv
ing the states of their equal representation. In
the plans applying the initiative and referendum
to the federal government, the rights of the
states are respected, and a vote to be binding
would have to bo concurred in by a majority of
the states as well as by a majority of the peo
ple. The Post's scare is therefore not only with
out foundation but ridiculously absurd. It was
not necessary for it to parade its knowledge of
tho population of Albany county and Delaware
and its passionate appeal to the south Is an in
sult to the intelligence of that section. The south
will get tired after awhile of being treated by
the plutocratic press as if it had no sense at
all. The voters of the south are intelligent.
They know the constitution and they also under
stand the principles of government. They be
lieve in a democratic form of government, and
they do not neea to study the subject of gov
ernment at the feet of the Washington Post.
The manner in which the suggestions of the
trust-controlled papers have been rejected by
the people of the south is proof that they not
only know what they want but that they know
why so many of our large dailies usp misleading
editorials. They know that tho owners of thcao
papers are attempting to chloroform thoir road
ors whilo tho beneficiaries of special privilege
aro picking tho pockota of thoso roadors.
Tho small states aro not afraid of tho In
itiatlvo and roforondum. Montana, Orogon and
South Dakota are small states, and yet, thoir
people havo already declared themselves In fa
vor of tho initiative and roforondum. Okla
homa is not a largo state, and yet, tho Initiative
and referendum aro a part of tho constitution.
Maino is not a largo state, and yot hor peoplo
voto at tho next election upon the adoption of
tho initiative and roforondum. Now .Torsoy in
not a largo state, and yot .one branch of her
logislaturo came within four votes of endorsing
tho initiativo and referendum.
No, tho small states need not bo afraid of
the initiativo and referendum, for whenever it
is applied to tho federal govornmont tho rights
of tho small states will bo protected as securely
as thoy aro now protected by tho constitution
thoy could not bo disregarded.
The Post says that "tho south would be as
powerless in tho grasp of tho masses of the
north as she was undor tho bayonets of recon
struction." Tho north would havo no greater
relative Influence undor the initiative and rofor
ondum than she has now, but tho people both
north and south would havo moro influence over
thoir govornmont, and that is why r.uch a bitter"
protest is made by thoso who distrust tho
people.
Tho Post says: "Will tho intelligence of
America submit to tho slums of our great cities
for review tho statesmanship that results from
tho deliberations of the representatives of tho
peoplo?" So it seems that, according to tho
Post, It is tho duty of tho representatives to do
tho thinking for tho people and if tho represent
atives betray the peoplo, tho voters aro not al
lowed to express" themselves. The betrayal of
tho public by city councils has led to tho adop
tion of tho initiativo and referendum for the
protection of the peoplo of the cities. Tho be
trayal of tho peoplo by stato legislators
has lod to tho adoption of tho initiativo and
referendum in several states, -and the contempt
uous indifference of the United State's senate to
tho. wishes of tho voters Is operating in the na
tion a? tho action of legislatures and city coun
cil's has operated in eta' and city.
OOOO
KEEP IT DARK
When H. H. Rogors of the Standard Oil
trust was about to sail, recently, for Europe, ho
vwas asked if there was "anything now in Stand
ard Oil affairs." Mr. Rogers replied: "No, thank
God for that."
There is a great deal moro of genuine
thanksgiving in this remark than some peoplo
might imagine. '
OOOO
AN AUTHORITY
Referring to an article about to bo written
by Senator Bevoridgo of Indiana, Senator Alli
son of Iowa says: "Mr. Boveridge must be alert
in this debate, for he Las In Mr. Bryan an able
antagonist who knows how to evade as well as
to assert."
Parenthetically it may bo remarked that
Senator Allison is an authority on "evasion:" '
OOOO
DON'T YOU MIND - "
I.
Trouble don't you mind it, and don't you, mind
" I the care, , -
Push 'em all behind you, and dream of heavens
fair.
The sorrows that, like shadows, come falling
'cross the way
Will fade before the sunbeams and blossoming
of May.
II.
Don't you mind the thunder, and skies that
threaten, low,
Don't you mind the wind sighs that keep a-wall-
ing so;
For every sigh we hear, dear, there'll come a
lilting tune
For every bit of trouble there'll come the smiles
of June!
III.
Don't you mind the grieving grief must play its
part; .
Tears must blind the sight, dear, ere joy creeps
In the heart.
Don't you mind the thistles that wound the
weary feet
We must know the bitter that we may know
y 1iq sweet!
Will F. Griffin, in Milwaukee Sentinel.
;uva:.JfttMrf.--r-'''-igfc--
