The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

1 V* • •> Annual Message Deals With One Subject DEFENDS DECISIONS OF COURT In Cases of Standard Oil and Tobacco Comoanies. THINKS AMENDMENTS NEEDED Present Statutes Good as Far M They Go but Suggests Supple­ mental Legislation--For Fed­ eral Corporation Law. Washington, Dec. 5.--President Taft's annual message, which was read |in both bouses of congress today, deals f«xolusively with the anti-trust statute. The full text of the message is as fol- !k>m: To the Senate and House of Repre­ sentatives: This message is the first of several which I shall send to con- tgress during the interval between the •opening of its regular session and its ^adjournment for the Christmas holi­ days. The amount of information to be leommunlcated as to the operations of fthe government, the number of lmpor- |tant subjects calling for comment by !the executive, and the transmission to (congress of exhaustive reports by spe- Idal commissions, make it impossible jto Include In one message of a reason- jable length a discussion of the topics (that ought to be brought to the atten- Itkm of the national legislature at its (first regular session. The Anti-Trust Law--The Supreme Court Decisions. In May last the Supreme court hand­ led down decisions in the suits in >«quity brought by the United States to isnjoin the further maintenance of the |8tandard Oil trust and ef the Ameri- jean Tobacco trust, aud to secure their iitissoluiion. The decisions are epoch- making and serve to advise the busi- IB8M world authoritatively of the scope laild operation of the anti-trust act of -WM. The decisions do not depart in i*liy substantial way from the previous t6ecisions of the court in construing •fld applyiiig this important statute, but they clarify those important deci­ sions by further defining the already •admitted exceptions to the literal con- litniction of the act. By the decrees, 'Ihoy furnish a useful precedent as to >the proper method of dealing with the capital and property of illegal trusts. 'These decisions suggest the need and Wisdom of additional or supplemental legislation to make it easier for the •51 tire business community to square with the rule of action and legality thus finally established and to preserve the benefit, freedom and spur of rea­ sonable competition without loss of Teal efficiency or progress. No Change In the Rule of Decision-- Merely in Its Form of Expression. The statute in its first section de­ clares to be illegal "every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the sev­ eral states or with foreign nations," and in the second, declares guilty of a misdemeanor every person who shall monopolize or attempt to monopolize or combine or conspire with any other person tp monopolize any part of the trade or commerce of the several states or with foreign nations." In two early cases, where the statute was invoked to enjoin a transportation agreement between interstate railroad companies, It was held that it was no defense to show that the agreement as to rates complained of was reasonal at common law, because It was said that the statute was directed against all contracts and combinations in re­ straint of trade whether reasonal at common law or not. It was plain from the record, however, that the contracts complained of In those cases would Hot have been deemed reasonable at common law. In subsequent cases the court said that the statute should be given a reasonal construction and re­ fused to Include within its inhibition certain contractual restraints of trade Which It dominated as incidental or as Indirect. These cases of restraint of trade that the court excepted from the operation Of the statute were Instances which, at common law, would have been called reasonable. In the Standard Oil and Tobacco cases, therefore, the court merely adopted the tests of the com­ mon law. and in defining exceptions to the literal application of the statute, only substituted for the test of being incidental or indirect, that of being reasonable and this, without varying In the slightest the actual scope and .effect of the statute. In other words, the cases under the statute which have upw been decided would have been decided the same way If the court had originally accepted in its construc­ tion the rule at.common law. It has been said that the court, by Introducing into the construction the statute common law distinctions, has emasculated It, This Is obviously untrue. By Its Judgment every con­ tract and combination in restraint of interstate trade made with the purpose or necessary effect of controlling prices by stifling competition, or of establish­ ing in whole or In part a monopoly of such trade, 1s condemned by the stat­ ute. The most extreme critics cannot Instance a case that ought to be con­ demned under the statute which is not brought within its terms as thus con­ strued. The suggestion is also made that the Supreme court by its decision In the last two cases has committed to the court the undefined and unlimited dis­ cretion to determine whether a case of restraint of trade Is within the terms of the statute. This is wholly untrue. A reasonable restraint of trade at common law is well under­ stood and is clearly defined. It does not rest in the discretion of the court. It must be limited to accomplish the purpose of a lawful main contract to which, in order that it shall be en­ forceable at all, it must be incidental. If it exceeds the needs of that contract it Is void. The test of reasonableness was never applied by the court at com­ mon-law to contracts or combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade whose purpose was or whose neces­ sary effect would be to stifle competi­ tion, to control prices, or establish monopolies. The courts never as­ sumed power to say that such con­ tracts or combinations or conspira­ cies might be lawful If the parties to them were only moderate in the use of the power thus secured and did not exact from the public too great and exorbitant prices. It is true that many theorists, and others en­ gaged in business violating the statue, have hoped that some such line could be drawn by courts; but no court of authority has ever at­ tempted It. Certainly there Is noth­ ing in the decisions of the latest two cases which should be a dangerous theory of judicial discretion in en­ forcing this statue can derive the slightest sanction. Force and Effectiveness of 8tatute a Matter of Growth. We have been twenty-one years making this statue effective for the purposes for which it was enacted. The Knight case was discouraging and seemed to remit to the states the whole available power to attack and suppress the evils of the trusts. Slowly, however, the errors of that judgment was corrected, and only In the last three or four years has the heavy hand of the law been laid upon the great illegal combinations that have exercised such an absolute do­ minion over many of our Industries. Criminal prosecutions have been brought and a number are pending, but juries have felt averse to convict­ ing for jail sentences, and judges have been most reluctant to impose such sen­ tences on men of respectable standing in society whose offense has been regarded as merely statutory. Stll\ as the offense becomes better under­ stood and the committing of It par­ takes more of studied and deliberate defiance of the law, we can be confi­ dent that juries will convict individ­ uals and that jail sentences will b-? imposed. The Remedy in Equity by Dissolution. In the Standard Oil case the Su­ preme and circuit courts found the combination to be a monopoly of thn interstate business of refining, trans porting, and marketing petroleum ant* its products, effected and maintained through thirty-seven different cof- porations, the stock of which was held by a New Jersey company. It In effect commanded the dissolution of this combination, directed 'the transfer and pro-rata distribution by the New Jersey company of the stock held by it in the thirty-seven corporations to and among its stock­ holders. and the corporations and In­ dividual defendants were enjoined from conspiring or combining to re­ store such monopoly; and all agree­ ments between the subsidiary corpor­ ations tending to produce or bring about further violations of the act were enjoined. In the Tobacco case, the court found that the Individual defendants, twenty-nine In number, had been en­ gaged in a successful effort to ac­ quire complete dominion over the manufacture, sale, and distribution of tobacco in this country and abroad, and that thid had been done by com­ binations made with a nurpose and effect to stifle competition, control prices, and establish a monopoly, not only in the manufacture of tobacco, but also of tin-foil and licorice used in its manufacture and of its products of cigars, cigarettes, and Snuffs. The tobacco suit presented a far more complicated and difficult case than the Standard Oil suit, for a decree which would effectuate ihe will of the court and end the v'olation of the statute There was here no single holding company as in the case of the Standard Oil truBt. The main company was the American Tobacco company, a manufacturing, selling, and holding company. The plan adopted (o destroy the combination and restore oompetltion involved the redlvlsion of the capital and plants of the whole trust between some of the companies constituting the trust and now companies organized for the purposes of the decree and made parties to it, and numbering, new and old, fourteen. Situation After Readjustment. The American Tobacco company (old) radjusted capital, $92,000,000; the Liggett and Meyers Tobacco com­ pany (new) capital. $67,000,000; the P. Ixvrillard company (new) oapltal. $47,000,000, and the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco company (old) capital, $7y 525,000, are chiefly engaged in the manufacture and sale of chewing and smoking tobacco and cigars. The former one tin-foil company Is di­ vided into two, one of $826,000 cap­ ital and the other of $400,000. The one snuff company Is divided Into three companies, one with a capital of $15,000,090; another wltji a cap­ ital of $8,000,000; and a tLlrd with a capital of $8,000,000. ¥he licorice companies are two, one with a cap­ ital of $5,768,00 and another with a capital of $2,000,000. There la, also, the British-American Tobacco com­ pany, a British corporation, doing business abroad with a capital of $26,000,000, the Porto Rlcan Tobac­ co company with a capital of $1,800,000, and the corporation of United Cigar Stores, with a capital of $9,000,000. Under this arrange­ ment each of the different kinds of business will be distributed between two or more companies, with a di­ vision of the prominent brands in thd same tobacco products, so as to make competition not only possible but necessary. Thus the smoking tobac­ co business of the country is divided so that the present independent com­ panies have 21.39 per cent., while the American Tobacco company will have 33.08 per cent., the Liggett and Meyers 20-06 per cent., the Lorillard company 22.82 per cent., and the Reynolds company 2.66 per cent. The stock of the other thirteen companies, both preferred and common, has been taken from the defendant American Tobacco company and lias been dis­ tributed among its stockholders. All covenants restricting competition have /been declared null and further per­ formance of them has been enjoined. The preferred stock of the different companies has now been given vot­ ing power which was denied it under the old organization. The ratio of the preferred stock to the common was as 78 to 40. This constitutes a very decided change in the character of the ownership and control of each company. In the original suit there were twen­ ty-nine defendants who were charged with being the conspirators through whom the illegal combination acquired and exercised its unlawful dominion. Under the decree these defendants will hold amounts of stock in the va­ rious distributee oompanles ranging from 41 per cent, as a maximum to 28% per cent, as a minimum, except in the case of one small company, the Porto Rican Tobacco company, in which they will hold 45 per cent. The twenty-nine individual defendants are enjoined for three years from buying any stock except from each other, and the group is thus prevented from extending its control during that pe­ riod. All parties to the suit, and the new companies who are made parties, are enjoined perpetually from in any way effecting any combination be­ tween any of the companies in viola­ tion of the statute by way of resump­ tion of the old trust. Each of the fourteen companies Is enjoined from acquiring stock in any of the others. All these companies are enjoined from having common directors or officers, or common buying or selling agents, or common offices, or lending money to each other. Size of New Companies. Objection was made by certain In­ dependent tobacco companies that this settlement was unjust because It left companies with very large capital In active business, and that the settle­ ment that would be effective to put all on an equality would be a division of the capital and plant of the trust into small factions in amount more nearly equal to that of each of the Independ­ ent companies. This contention re­ sults from a misunderstanding of the anti-trust law and its purpose. It is not Intended thereby to prevent the accumulation of large capital in busi­ ness, enterprises In which such a com­ bination can Becure reduced cost, of production. Bale and distribution. It is directed against such an aggrega­ tion of ca'pital only when its purpose is that of stifling competition, enhanc­ ing or controlling prices and estab­ lishing a monopoly. If we shall have by the decree defeated these purposes and restored competition between the large units into which the capital and plant have been divided, we shall have accomplished the useful purpoee of the statute. Confiscation Not the Purpos# of the 8tatute. It Is not the purpose of the statute to confiscate the property and capital of the offending trusts. Methods of punishment by fine or imprisonment of the Individual offenders, by fine of the -corporation, or by forfeiture of Its goods in transportation, are provided, but the proceeding in equity is a spe­ cific remedy to stop the operation of the trust by Injunction and prevent the future use of the plant and capital in violation of the statute. Effectiveness of Decree. I venture to say that not In the his­ tory of American law has a decree more effective for such a purpose been entered by a court than that against the Tobacco trust. As Circuit Judge Noyes said In his Judgment ap­ proving the decree: "The extent to which It has been necessary to tear apart this combina­ tion and force it Into new forms with the attendant burdens ought to dem­ onstrate that the federal anti-trust statute Is a drastic statute which ac oorapllshes effective results; which »o long as it stands on the statute books must be obeyed, and which cannot be disobeyed without incurring far- reaching penalties. And, on the oth­ er hand, the successful reconstruction of this organization should teach that the effect of enforcing this statute is not to destroy, but to reconstruct; not to demolish but to re-create in ac­ cordance with the conditions which the congress has declared ahall exist among til* (Mtoplsot >£19 .7 tAdfad States." v ^ \ vt" Common-Stock Ownership. It has been assumed that the pres­ ent pro-rata and common ownership In all these pompanles by former stockholders of the trust would insure a continuance of the same old single control of all the > oompanles into which the trust lias by decree been disintegrated. This Is erroneous and is based upon the assumed inefflcacy and lnnocuousness of Judicial injunc­ tions. The companies are enjoined from co-operation or oomblnatlon; they have different managers, direc­ tors, purchasing and sales agents. If all or any of the numerous stockhold­ ers, reaching Into the thousands, at­ tempt to secure concerted action of the companies with a view to the con­ trol of the market, their number is so large that such an attempt eould not well be concealed and Its prime mov­ ers and all Its participants would be at once subject to contempt proceed­ ings and Imprisonment of a summary character. The immediate result of the present situation will necessarily be activity by all the companies un­ der different managers, and then com- petition must follow, or there will be activity by one company and stag- action by another. Only a short time will inevitably lead to a change in ownership of the stock, as all oppor­ tunity for continued co-operation must disappear. Those, critics who gpeftk of this disintegration* in the trust as a mere change of garments have itot given consideration to the inevitable working of the decree and understand little the personal danger of attempt­ ing to evade or set at naught the sol­ emn Injunction of a court whofln ob­ ject Is made plain by the decree and whose inhibitions are set forth with a detail and comprehensiveness unex­ ampled in the history of equity Juris­ prudence. The effect of these two decisions has led to decrees dissolving the combina­ tion of manufacturers of electric lamps, a southern wholesale grocers' associa­ tion, an Interlocutory decree against the powder trust with directions by the circuit court competing dissolu­ tion, and other combinations of a sim­ ilar history are now negotiating with the department of Justice looking to a disintegration by decree and reorgan ization In accordance with law. It seems possible to bring about these re- organ iza: tons without general business disturbance. Movement for Repeal of the Anti-Trust Law. But now that the anti-trust act is seen to be effective for the accomplish­ ment of the purpose of its enactment, we are met by a cry from many differ­ ent quarters for its repeal. It is said to be obstructive of business progress, to be an attempt to restore old-fash­ ioned methods of destructive competi tion between small units, and to make impossible those useful combinations of capital and the reduction of the cost of production that are essential to con­ tinued prosperity and normal growth. In the recent decisions the Supreme court makes clear that there Is noth­ ing in the Statute which condemns combinations of capital or mere big ness of plant organized to secure economy in production and a reduc­ tion of its cost. It is only when the purpose or necessary effect of the or­ ganization and maintenance of the combination or the aggregation of im­ mense size are the stifling of competi­ tion, actual and potential, and the en­ hancing of prices and establishing a monopoly, that the statute is violated. Mere size is no sin against the law. The merging of two or more business, plants necessarily eliminates competi­ tion between the units thus Combined, but this elimination is in contravention of the statute only when the combina­ tion iB made for purpose of ending this particular competition in order to se­ cure control of, and enhance, prices and create a monopoly. Lack of Definiteness In the Statute. The complaint is made of the statute that it is not sufficiently definite In its description of that which is forbid­ den, to enable business men to avoid its violation. The suggestion Is, that we may have a combination of two corporations, which may run on for years, and that subsequently the attor­ ney general may conclude that it was a violation of the statute, and that which was supposed by the combiners to be Innocent then turns out to be a combination in violation of the stat­ ute. The answer to this hypothetical case is that when men attempt to amass stupendous capital as will en­ able them to suppress competition, control prices and establish a monop­ oly they know the purpose of their acts. Men do not^ do such a thing without having it Tlearly In mind. If what they do Is merely for the purpose of reducing the cost of production, without the thought of suppressing competition by use of the bigness of the plant they are creating, then they cannot be convicted at the time the union is made, nor can they be con­ victed later, unless it happen that later on they conclude to suppress competi­ tion and take the usual methods for doing so, and thus1 establish for them­ selves a monopoly. They can, in such a case, hardly complain if the motive which subsequently Is disclosed is at­ tributed by the court to the original combination. New Remedies Suggested. Much is said of the repeal of this statute and of constructive legislation Intended to accomplish the purpose and blaze a clear path for honest mer­ chants and business men to follow. It may be that such a plan will be evolved, but I submit that the discus­ sions which have been brought out in recent days by the fear of the con­ tinued execution of the anti-trust law have produced nothing but glittering generalities and have offered no line of distinction or ruli ot action as definite and as clear as that whioh the Supreme court Itself lays down la en­ forcing the statute. 'Supplemental Legislation Needsd--Not Repeal or Amendment. ' . I see no objection--and Indeed I can see decided advantages--in the enact­ ment of a law which shall describe and denounce methods of competition, which are unfair and are badges of the unlawful purpose denounced In the anti-trust law. The attempt and pur pose to suppress a competitor by un­ derselling him at a price so unprofit­ able as to drive him out of business, or the making of exclusive contracts with customers under which they aria required to give up association with other manufacturers, and numerous kindred methods for stifling competi­ tion and effecting monopoly, should be described with sufficient accuracy In a criminal statute on the one hand to enable the government to shorten Its task by prosecuting single misde­ meanors instead of an entire con­ spiracy, and, on the other hand, to 6eijve the purpose of pointing out more In detail to the business com­ munity what must be avoided. Federal Incorporation Recommended. In a special message to congress on January 7, 1910, I ventured to point out the disturbance to business that would probably attend the disso­ lution of these offending ^trusts. I said: "But such an investigation and pos­ sible prosecution of corporations whose prosperity or destruction affects the comfort not only of stockholders but of millions of wage earners, em­ ployes, and associated tradesmen must necessarily ^nd to disturb the con­ fidence of the business community, to dry up the now flowing sources of capital from Its places of hoarding, and produce a halt in our present prosperity that will cause suffering and strained circumstances among the innocence many for the faults of the guilty few. The question which I wish in this message to bring clear­ ly to the consideration and discus­ sion of congress is whether, in order to avoid such a possible business danger, something cannot be done by which these business combinations may be offered a means, without great financial disturbance, of changing the cha^cter, organization, and extent of their business into one within the lines of the law under federal control and supervision, securing compliance with the anti-trust statute. "Generally, in the industrial com­ binations called 'Trusts,' the prin­ cipal business is the sale of goods in many Btates and in foreign markets; in other words, the interstate and for­ eign business far exceeds the busi­ ness done in any one state. This fact will justify the federal govern­ ment in granting a federal charter to such a combination to make and sell in Interstate and foreign com­ merce the products of useful manu­ facture under Buch limitations as will secure a compliance with the anti­ trust law. It is possible so to frame a statute that while it offers protec­ tion to a federal company against harmful, vexatious, and unnecessary invasion by the states, it shall sub­ ject it to reasonable taxation and control by the states with respect to Its purely local business. "Corporations organized under this act should be prohibited from ac­ quiring and holding stock in other corporations (except for special rea­ sons, upon approval by the proper federal authority), thus avoiding the creation under national auspices of the holding company with subordinate corporations in different states, which has been such an effective agency in the creation of the great trusts and monopolies. "If the prohibition of the anti-trust act against combinations in restraint of trade is to be effectively enforced, it is essential that the national gov­ ernment shall provide for the creation of national corporations to carry on a legitimate business throughout the United States. The conflicting laws of the different states of the Union with respect to foreign corporations makes it difficult, if not impossible, for one corporation to comply with their re­ quirements so as to carry on business in a number of different states." I renew the recommendation of the enactment of a gqheral law providing for the voluntary formation of cor­ porations to engage in trade and com­ merce among the states and with for­ eign nations. Every argument which was then advanced for such a law, and every explanation which was at that time offered to possible objec­ tions, have been confirmed by our ex­ perience since the enforcement of the anti-trust statute has resulted In the actual dissolution of active com­ mercial organizations. It Is even more manifest now than it was then that the denunciation of conspiracies in restraint of trade should not and does not mean the de­ nial of organizations large enough to be intrusted with our interstate and foreign trade. It has been made more clear now than it was then that a purely negative statute like the anti­ trust law may well be supplemented by specific provisions for the build­ ing up and regulation of legitimate national and foreign commerce. Government Administrative Experts Needed to Aid Courts In Trust Dissolutions. The drafting of the decrees in the dissolution of the present trusts, with a View to their reorganization into legitimate corporations, haB made It especially apparent that the courts are not provided with the administra­ tive machinery to make the neces­ sary inquiries preparatory to re­ organization, or to pursue such in­ quiries, and they should be empow­ ered to Invoke the aid of the bdreau of corporations in determining the suitable reorganization of the disin­ tegrating parts. The elrcalt *eurs and the attorney general were great­ ly aided in framing the decree in th« tobacco trust dissolution by an ex* pert from the bureau of corporations. Federal Corporation Commission Pro- I do not set forth in detail the term* and sections of a statute which might supply the constructive legislation perw mitting and aiding the formation of combinations of capital Into federal corporations. They ehould be subject to rigid rules as to their organization and procedure, including effective pub­ licity, and to the closest supervision as to the Issue of stock and bonds by an executive bureau or commission In the department of commerce and labor, to which in tlmeB of doubt they might yell submit their proposed plans for future business. It must be distinctly understood that Incorporation under a federal law could not exempt the com­ pany thus formed and its incorporators and. managers from prosecution under the anti-trust law for subsequent ille­ gal conduct, but the publicity of Its procedure and the opportunity for fre­ quent consultation with the bureau or commission in charge of the incorpora tion as to the legitimate purpoee of Its transactions would offer It as great se­ curity against successful prosecutions for violations of the law as would be practical or wise. Such a bureau or commission might well be invested also with the duty al­ ready referred to, of aiding courts In the dissolution and recreation of trusts within the law. It should be an execu­ tive tribunal of the dignity and power of the comptroller of the currency or the interstate commerce commission, which now exercise supervisory power over important classes of corporations under federal regulation. The drafting of such a federal incor­ poration law would offer ample oppor­ tunity to prevent many manifest evils In corporate management today. In- eluding irresponsibility of control In the hands of the few who are not the real owners. Incorporation Voluntary. I recommend that the federal char­ ters thus to be granted shall be Volun­ tary, at least until experience Justifies mandatory provisions. The benefit to be derived from the operation of great businesses under the protection of such a charter would attract all who are anxious to keep within the lines of the law. Other large combinations that fail to take advantage of the fed­ eral Incorporation will not have a right to complain if their failure Is ascribed to unwillingness to submit their transactions to the careful scru­ tiny, competent supervision and pub­ licity attendant upon the enjoyment of such a charter. Supplemental Legislation Needed. The opportunity thus suggested for federal incorporation, it seems to me, is suitable constructive legislation needed to facilitate the squaring of great industrial enterprises to the rule of action laid down by the anti-trust law. This statute Is construed by the Supreme court must, continue to be the line of distinction for legiti­ mate business. It must be enforced, unless we are to banish individualism from all business and reduce it to one common system of regulation or con­ trol of prices like that which now pre- vails with respect to public utilities, and which when applied to all bufl- ness would be a long step toward state socialism. Importance of the Anti-Trust Act. The anti-trust act is the expression of the effort of a freedom-loving peo­ ple to preserve equality of opportun­ ity. It is the result of the confident determination of such a people to maintain their future growth by pre­ serving uncontrolled and unrestricted the enterprise of the Individual, his ingenuity, his intelligence and his in­ dependent courage. For twenty years or more this stat­ ute has been upon the statute book. All knew of its general purpoee and approved. Many of its violators were cynical over Its assumed impotence. It seemed impossible of enforce­ ment. Slowly the mills of the courts ground, and only gradually did the ma­ jesty of the law assert itself. Many of its statesmen-authors died before it became a living force, and they and others saw the evil grow which they had hoped to destroy. Now, its effi­ cacy is seen; now its pow^r is heavy; now Its object Is near achievement. Now we hear the call for its repeal on the plea that It interferes with busi­ ness prosperity, and we are advised in most general terms how, by some other statute and in some other way, the evil we are Just stamping out can be cured, if we only abandon this work of twenty years and try another ex­ periment for another term of years. It is said that the act has not done good. Can this be said In the face of the effect of the Northern Securities decree? That decree was In no way so dras­ tic or inhlbltive in detail as either the Standard Oil decree or the tobacco de­ cree; but did it not stop for all time the then powerful movement toward the control of all the railroads of the country in a single hand? Such a one-man power could not have been a healthful instance in the republic, even though exercised under the general supervision of an inter­ state commission. Do we desire to make such ruthless combinations and monopolies lawful? When all energies are directed, not toward the reduction of the cost of production for the public benefit by a healthful competition, but toward new ways and means for making perma­ nent in a few hands tbe absolute con­ trol of the conditions and prices pre­ vailing in the whole field of industry, then Individual enterprise and effort will be paralysed and the spirit of commercial freedom will be dead. WM. H TAFT. Bargains. "Once I could have bought the site Of Chicago for $400 In Mexican money." "I know how it is. old chap. I had a chance to huy a beefsteak once for 3.1 ceots a pound." Premature. Stage Hero (in backwoods town)-- Jit last ."fai r Gwendolyn, we are alone- Lone Member of Audience--Not yet. •Call it off till »he end of this act. I'm going then. Unlikely to Pass. "Can't you settle this bill today, sir?" asked the tailor of the delinquent senator. "No, Shears; It wouldn't be parlia­ mentary. I've merely glanced over it, von know, and I can't pass a bill until J after Its third reading."--Judge. Monkeys. There Is a Chinese proverb which says a monkey may occupy a throne. A monkey may also pay for a cham- ipagne dinner. Where We Are Strong. We may be derelict In safeguarding human life, but no people on earth can equal the moral fervor with which we hunt for the responsible man aft­ er the event.--New York Bvenlng Post. Useful Railroad Oevtes. Connecting a hinged step with the air-brake system, an Englishman has invented a device to prevent a train starting while a passenger is alighting from or boarding a car. A Neat Device. "The governments which have re­ bellions on their hands ought to es­ tablish a toboggan system In their ar­ mies." "What good would that do?" "It would make it easy for them to shoot the insurgents down." Apologetic. Hospitable Carter (after borrowing a match from stranger to whom he has offered a lift)--"Y'see, I b'alnt al­ lowed t* 'ave no matches when I be cartln' biarstin' powder fur them old quarries up along."--Punch. Concordance Due to Monks. Nearly every bible today has a con­ cordance at the back. The first con­ cordance was prepared by French monks in the year 1247. Both Lose. j When an election bet is paid by the loser trundling the winner in a wheel- barrow one is never sure which party to the wager deserves the greatest sympathy.--Cincinnati Times-Star. I Fitted for the Battle. "Well, boy, what do you know ? Can you write a business letter? Can you do sums?" "Please, sir, said the applicant for a Job, "we didn't go Id very much for those studies at our school. But I'm fine on bead work or clay modeling. At Your \^pnderfiil New Treatment for Eld* Mys, Bladder, Rheumatism, Back­ ache-- of Ifree San- 3^t|:©>Ten Away! To prove tW'.keirtSs. at last, one really dependable -"WWdr, for all such disorders, tu6 snakeiv • 's Kidney Pills h&T# authorized avugsiste everywhere to dlstrib- ate free trial packag-es to all applicants. Do you _suffer from diabetes, dropsy. Bright s Disease, pain, in bladder, rheuma tism in any fonm 1*""-frank sobs.aids ache, head acbe--whole body ache? Pslar; or twitching in eroias or limbs? Muscles sore, tender. Inflamed? Difficult? !c retain® m» urine? Soalding, burning seneaMonf Sediment in urine, or unnatural color? 5fe?° voua? Depressed? Heed tha danger sisnaUS Don't wait until t's too late! Go to the nearest drusr-atore at once, ret Dr. Derby's Kidney Pills--you'll thank your Stars tor having: done so. It's the one Safe, scientific remndy. No bad after effeete, 'Old in 25c and 50o packages. If you. want; to try them first, ask for the free sample. If drajrsist can't supply you. send direot to Derby Medicine Co.. Eaton Rapids. Mloh ORDER HE COULDN'T DISOBEY What Wss Poor Darky to Do When "Old St. Luke Hisseir Gave Directions. The venerable rector of St. Luke's has a saintly and apostolic appear­ ance. He also has decided opinions of his own on most matters and is not averse to expressing them. Recently, unknown to him, the vestry decided to have the next supply of coal for the church put in a different cellar from the one commonly used. When the coal was delivered the rector, seeing the drayman making what he thought was a mistake in Its disposal, inter­ posed and in no uncertain terms bade the darky place the coal in the cellar always u6ed for that purpose. Tbe senior warden several days later was much annoyed to discover that his orders had been disregarded and that the coal was in tbe same old cellar. With wrath In his eye he com­ plained to the coal dealer. The latter declared that he had carefully ex­ plained to the drayman wbere to put the coal, so to settle the matter the darky was called up. "Sam, you black rascal," thundered the coal man, "didn't I tell you to put that coal for St. Luke's in the cellar opening on Fourth street?" "Yassah." "Mr. Smith tells me you didn't do it. Why can't you carry out my or­ ders?" The darky grinned sheepishly, hesi­ tated, scratched his head, "Well, boss, you see,'I done started taput dat coal wheh you tole me--yassah, I done started--an' ole St. Luke hisselw he come out and gimme fits about it."-- Harper's Magazine. W. L. DOUGLAS' TRUST PUN Manufacturer Thinks Government Should Obtain Publicity by a License System. Large business organizations have come to stay. We cannot go back to old conditions. We nguist meet world competition. Large concerns can pro­ duce goods at lower cost than small ones. Germany favors large corpora­ tions. The method of the present na­ tional administration is to dissolve the great organizations and make them smaller, which is a backward step. There should be no limit to a corporation doing a large and legitl mate business, sucb as would be pos­ sible under the licensing plan which I favor, writes W. L. Douglas, former governor of Massachusetts, in the Boston Herald. Prejudices against corporations merely because they are big, perhaps, must be done away with. They give labor better returns. They cheapen product and thus benefit the consum­ er. They give opportunities to small Investors who get returns otherwise unattainable. They employ able young men who have no capital at all, but who receive handsome sal­ aries for their ability and service. In place of the Sherman law It Is my opinion there should be a depart­ ment at Washington to grant licenses to all manufacturers end corporations In this country who do an interstate commerce business. The law should be made so clear, plain and definite that it could not be misunderstood. It should require all capital to be paid in full. Semi-yearly statements should be given to tbe public and certified by a public ac- countaint. There should be a board of examiners in each state to look aft­ er these corporations Just as our na tional banks are watfbed by the na­ tional government. They should have the right to enter the offices and ex­ amine the records of all the direc­ torates of these companies. Inequality Necessary. If everybody wer * like everybody else, the world would be as dull as the dead and as Unbearable as the grave* graveyar' Accurately informed. "How is it that woman seems to know so much more about Europe than most of us?" said the frank and out­ spoken lady. "Because." replied Miss Cayenne, "she stayed at home and read guide books instead of squandering her time In travel." Stiff neck! Doesn't amount to much, but mightv disagreeable. ^ ou will be sur­ prised to see how quickly Hamlins Wizard Oil will tfcive that stiffness out. One night, that » all. His heart was as great as the world, but there was no room in it to hold the memory of a wrong.--Emerson. Constipation causes many serious dis­ eases. It is thoroughly cured by Doctor Pierce's Pleasant Pellets. One a laxative, three for cathartic. Many a man oould lose his reputa­ tion and never miss it. *