THE IRBIGATION AGE. 



167 



they will last for seasons and pay a heavy annual dividend 

 on the capital invested. There is, however, too much care- 

 lessness practiced in this respect. Some farmers consider 

 themselves too poor to build a shed to shelter their wagons 

 and farm implements, and as a consequence they are left 

 outdoor exposed to the wind and weather with the result 

 that after one year's use the machinery is in bad shape and 

 after two or three more years is utterly worthless, necessi- 

 tating a large outlay for new machinery. As a matter of 

 fact a set of farm implements, when properly cared for and 

 intelligently used, should last with reasonable repairs fifteen 

 to twenty years. 



The irrigator in addition to the farm- tools, has his 

 irrigation appliances to look after and they, .should care for 

 them to keep them up to their best efficiency. Ditches should 

 be cleaned out and reshaped and sediment should be removed 

 from flumes; gates should be operated and repaired when- 

 ever necessary, and in fact everything used by him during the 

 growing season should be placed in readiness for the ap- 

 proaching spring and summer. Then with good tools and 

 careful and continuous work he may reasonably expect 

 when harvest time arrives to participate in a good share of an 

 abundant crop, which is much more of a certainty to him 

 then to the average farmer for the reason that he does not 

 need to worry about the rain, as he can turn on the water 

 whenever his fields or crop require it. 



Much has been said on the subject of 

 Regulation legislation relating to trusts without 



Does Not reaching any desirable or definite re- 



Mean suits. The Sherman anti-trust law as 



Extermination now u P n tne statute book is evidently 

 in need of revision, for the reason that 

 it provides for the destruction of business rather than for 

 proper regulation. There is no doubt in the mind of any 

 reasonable citizen of the United States as to the necessity 

 of supervision of large business concerns in which there 

 is no competition to provide against unreasonable ex- 

 ploitation of the public. This very thing has been done 

 for many years by our government through the Interstate 

 Commerce Commission in everything pertaining to the 

 various railway systems. It is true, when the Interstate 

 Commerce Commisison was first organized there devel- 

 oped bitter opposition by the railway corporations 

 against such government interference with business, but 

 after some years of experience the wisdom of that ar- 

 rangement has been proven, as it protects the corpora- 

 tions and citizens alike, preventing on the one hand ex- 

 orbitant rates for freight and passenger business, and on 

 the other hand guards against injury to the business of the 

 common carriers by unreasonable legislation in the vari- 

 ous states; thus, what at first sight seemed to be a threat- 

 ening innovation, has proven a blessing, and there is to- 

 day no intelligent citizen who does not approve of the 

 Interstate Commerce Commission as a proper and satis- 

 factory safeguard of the national transportation systems. 

 Referring back now to the suit of the government 

 dissolving the Standard Oil Company, it would seem 

 that the remedy applied is of no practical value. Every- 

 one knows that the Standard Oil Company had developed 

 during the many years of its existence methods of pro- 

 duction and distribution which were far ahead of anything 

 small operators could attempt, and the fact of the matter 

 is that the quality of the product was constantly made 

 better and the prices, due to the introduction of economical 

 methods, had constantly been decreased. It is equally 



true that the corporation enjoyed enormous dividends 

 and possessed the prerogative to increase them at will by 

 merely raising the selling price of its products, after all 

 real competition had been absorbed. It is right here 

 where our government should have created an Interstate 

 Oil Commission for the purpose of going into all the de- 

 tails of the operations of the Standard Oil Company, with 

 powers to determine what the selling price of the various 

 oil product should be at the different localities. That this 

 plan is feasible and capable of extension to other monopo- 

 listic corporations cannot be denied and should apply to 

 all corporations which have not any adequate competi- 

 tion. This would certainly bring about more desirable 

 results than the dissolution of one big corporation and 

 the creation of a large number of smaller concerns. 



There is a Tumor current at this time that the ad- 

 ministration in Washington has determined to prosecute 

 the International Harvester Company under the Sherman 

 act. No one denies the fact that the Harvester Company 

 is one of the most efficient producers of farm machinery, 

 tools and implements in the world, but that does not 

 make it a monopoly. Its trade is as wide as the grain- 

 producing areas of the world. It is a great assistance in 

 growing the food supply of consumers everywhere, and 

 the demand for food is more pronounced than ever be- 

 fore. 



Is this the time to cripple the Harvester Company by 

 politicians who think it is popular to crush out of exist- 

 ence all big business? It is imperative that the food 

 supply shall be certain and abundant. Without such 

 great manufacturing concerns as the Harvester Company, 

 this is impossible. 



We are past the day of production on a small scale; 

 large supplies of food are vitally necessary; they can be 

 produced only by the use of agricultural machinery; and 

 such concerns as the Harvester Company should be wel- 

 comed rather than destroyed. 



It is self-evident to everybody, except the self-blinded 

 politicians, that large combinations of capital, that pay 

 good wages, can develop, manufacture and distribute bet- 

 ter machinery, at a less cost, than the small concerns, the 

 little foundries and machine shops, competing to put each 

 other into bankruptcy. 



From the foregoing considerations it seems clear that 

 our present methods of handling the trust problem spell 

 ruin for the business of this country and that it is high 

 time that a halt be called and steps be taken to remedy 

 present defects. We are past the stage when we required 

 competition in every line of business; competition means 

 increased cost of production, and in many cases inferior 

 quality of material and workmanship. A large corpora- 

 tion, by virtue of its better organization and by manufac- 

 turing on a large scale, can produce a better quality of 

 goods at a -lower cost and is in this way enabled to fur- 

 nish the consumer a better and" cheaper article than the 

 small shop under a competitive system. But the function 

 of the government is to see that such a corporation does not 

 take undue advantage of these facts and that its charge to 

 the consumers are reasonable. 



This seems best to be accomplished by the creation 

 of an Industrial Commission having similar functions and 

 powers regarding manufacturing as the Interstate Com- 

 merce Commission has in relation to the common carriers. 

 If such a commission is called into existence with proper 

 powers and proper bounds conservatively administered 

 there seems to us no reason why this perplexing problem 



