Democratic Sentinel, Volume 14, Number 12, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 April 1890 — THE GRASPING TRUSTS. [ARTICLE]

THE GRASPING TRUSTS.

A High Protection Paper’s Reas6n Why They Exist and Flourish. (Philadelphia Telegraph) The New York Herald, Democratic and anti-protection as it is, has done a good thine for tbe conntry by giving publication to the long list of trusts which Senator Vest, of Missouri, made part of his speech during the debate last Friday on Senator Sherman’s Anti-Trust Bill. We reproduce it here from the editorial page of the Herald for the benefit of those who are of the opinion that a tariff bill always truly represents the good and necessary principles of protection for the people. They will perceive from this list that, in too many cases, it represents only corporate greed and the oppression of the people. Tne list is as follows: 1. The steel and rail trust, buttressed by a tariff tax of sl7 per ton. 2. The nail trust, by a tariff tax of $1.25 per 100 pounds. 3. The iron nut and washer trust, bv a tax of 82 per 100 pounds. 4. The barbed fence-wire trust, by a tax of 60 cents per 100 pounds. 5. The copper trust, |by a tax of $2.50 per 100 pounds. 6. The lead trust, by a tax of $2.50 per 100 pounds. 7. The slate pencil trust, by a tax of 30 per cent. 8. The nickel trust, by a tax of sls per 100 pounds. 9. The zinc trust, by a tax of $2.50 per 100 pounds. 10. The sugar trust, by tax of $2 per 100 pounds. 11. The oil-cloth trust, by a tax of 40 per cent. 12.. The jute bag trust, b / a tax of 40 per cent. 13. Tho cordage trust, by a tax of 30 per cent 14 The paper envelope trust, by a tax of 25 per cent. 15. The gutta percha trust, by a tax of 35 per cent. 16. The castor-oil trust, by a tax of 80 cents per gallon. 17. Ihe linseed oil trust, by a tax of 25 cents per gallon. 18. The cottonseed oil trust, by a tax of 25 cents per gallon. 19. The borax trust, by a tax of ssper 100 pou ds. 20. The ultramarine tiust, a tax of s*f per hundred pounds. Senator Sherman, in support of his hill, added to the foregoing the names of several other trusts, among them that of the Sta dard Oil company and the Diamond Match company, at the head of which is that approved patriot General Alger. The Mateh Trust was composed of thirty-one different factories, all of which except thiiteen were closed as soon as the Trust got control of them In a case in which the Trust, or Diamond Match company was the defendant, General Alger was asked the following question: “It appears that during the years 1881 and 1882 large sums cf money were expended to keep men out of the match business, remove competition, buy machinery and patents, and, in some instances, purchase other match factories. I will ask you to state the reasons, if any there are, why those sums should not be treated as an expense of the business and charged off from th.s account?”

To which he replied: “Because the price of matches was kept up to correspond so as to pay these expenses and make large dividends above what could have been made had those factories been in the market to compete with the busines That question and answer would fit any t ust to which they might or could be applied. They tell the whol<i story, secret and open, of trusts, which exist solely because of duties which are exce sive—excessive far beyond the point of j«st and desirable protection. The manufacturers have gone before the Ways and Means committee and have induced that body

to fix such duties as they desired whi h being made the lawful duties, they nave farmed trusts or monopolies, and, by virtue of the law made oy the servants of the people, they have plundered and oppressed the peopfc by restricting production and utting an extortionate price on their goods, which generally are among the neoess ries of life, j * In evefy single case in whiah the duty imposed on any article of general consumption is the vital cause of that article being monopolized by trusts, the duty should be repealed. The action of congress should be unalterable in every such case. The organization of a trust to control the output of any manufacture, and to put an arbitrary price upon it, should be sufficient to place that particular article on the free list. If that policy were made the unchangeable rule of congress, all present trusts would disappear, and no new ones would take their places. v It is the hight of lolly, if it be not insincerity, for Senator Sherman and others to go beating about the bush pretending to de stroy the trusts by the cumber*, seme and inadequate devices of special acts, when they may be destroyed by the very direct and simple process of repealing the particular duties on which the trusts are built and which sustain them. If senator Sherman is sincere in his alleged hatred of trusts, let him move to take away the prop > which support them. If that be done the trusts will fall. Several of the states have adopted anti-trust laws; but in every case they have been proved useless the moment the effort was made to enforce them'. Just as much hs the wheel is turned by the water falling upon it, are the trusts created and fostered by excessive duties — by dut.es which are far and away beyond the point of genuine, honest protection. Tho tariff was never intended to be used as a means to enrish a small class at the loss and to the injury of the great mass of the people It was intended for the mutual benefit; and so soon as it ceases to secure that, in respect to any single duty, that dnty should be removed.

A few very rich men, by reason of duties which are excessive, are enabled in any special line of industry to buy out or drive out of business small manufacturers and so control the entire output and fix upon it whatever price they please. The first thing the Sugars Trust did, after capitalizing what was worth sl4 000,000 at $50,000,000, was to close down half the refineries and nearly double the price of sugar. The Diamond Match Trust, of which that blatant demagogue General Alger is, chief, closed eighteen of its thirty-one factories as so n as it got possession of them. In both cases —in all cases of trusts—excessive duties enabled them to do it Duties which are so high as to create and sustain trusts are not protective but oppressive duties, and should be and with their repeal all trusts would fall.