The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1889-06-18

| State Reports), salt trust was or
ganlzed, and the court in declaring II
illegal said: "Public policy unones.
tionably favors competition in trade
to the end that its commodities NAV
be afforded to the consumer as cheap
ly as possible The clear tendency
of such an agreement is to establish
competition In trade. 1t is no answer
to say that competition was not in
fact destroyed, or that the price of
the commodity was not in fact ad-
vanced. Courts will not stop to in.
jury inflicted on the puplic. It is
enough to know that the invitable
tendency of such contracts is iniuri.
Gus to the public" In Pennsylva.
MIA case five coal companies organized
to control the output of certain dis
trict Of coal, and in Morris Run Coal
Co, q. Barcley Run Coal Go. the court
decided the arrangement conspiracy.
In Arnot q. Pittston Coal Co. the
New York Court of Appeals declared
that such a combination was outside
of the pale and protection of the law.
In louisiana ute-bagging trust
came up for review before the courts
in India Bagging Co. o. Kock, and it
was declared to be an agreement
palpably and unequivocally in res
traint Of trade, contrary to public or
der, and unenforcable in court of jus
tice.
In Illinois, in Craft o. McConoughy
the court said: ''The four firms bya
shrewed, deep-laid secret combina-
tion attempted to control and monop-
olize the entire grain trade of the
town and surrounding country. That
the effct of this contract was to res
train the trade and commerce of this
country is proposition that cannot
successfully be denied"
In New York, in 1882, five lines of
steamboats, made trust of the steam
boat business. The Supreame Court
said: 1t is familiar maxim that
competition is the life Of trade. It
follows that whatever destroys or
even relaxes competition in trade is
injurious if not fatal to it." The
Court of louisiana, according to the
New York Times, gave what that pa
per called black eye to the oil trust
The suit was brought to compRl a
forfeiture of it's charter on the ground
that it had amalgamated with the
cotton seed oil trust, and the court
said Corporations have no power
ordinarily and without express authr.
ity to consolidate or from partner
ships with other corporations, and
still less can they make such combi-
nations in order ..to establish monop-
oIies and unlawfully restrain the
natural and legitimate course of com.
merce."
That these combinations are
mencaae to the liberties and material
prosperity of the people seems un-
questionable. Organized to control
the very artereis Unpopular substance;
in league with one another support
ed by immense capital unscrupulous
in their neoduS operandi controlled by
a bond of secrecy based on mutual
self-interest ready to cast their in
fuence, power and wealth with the
political party which may bid for
their strength by sacrificing popular
interests, they form a tower of
strength against popular indignation.
But the remedy is simple: without
the encouragement of paternal gov
ernment imposing taxes on Peter to
hand to Paul in order to assist him in
his business, these monstrosities could
never exist year in free land.
And when once the system of legal
lied robbery known as protective
tariff, which makes these things pos
sible, shall be repealed, its protege,
the trust, will fall like the walls of
Jericho before the trumpet of for
eign competition ''Trade restric-
tions, says Herbert Spencer, "are of
the same race with irresponsible gov
ernment and slavery interferences
with the freedom of exchange are as
certainly their progeny as are the
worst violations of human rights:
they are constantly found in the so
c1ety OF these and although not popu-
larly classed as crimes, they are in
both origin and nature closely related
to them" JAMES r. MINTURE.