The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1890-01-14

private monopolies for the easy APP.
pearance of a single great public
monopoly that shall manage all indus
try in the name of all the people.
A popular novel, just nov having
a greai "run," illustrates this quicken.
ing of their faith. A clever New
England writer, sitting down to dream
out ga fairy tale of social felicity !"
and "to hang in mid air a cloud palace
of an ideal humanity" did not ven
lure, at first, to place it's relaxation
nearer in time than the thirtieth cen
fury.
Stumbling upon what he believed
might be the corner. stone of a new
social order-the naturalization of in
dustry-he changed his story, and
made it the vehicle of a definite
scheme for recognizing society.
To his rapt gaze a thousand years
dropped out of the foreground, and
the close of the twentieth century
found all the people enrolled in one
great industrial army, and all the in
dustry and trade of the country taken
from the corporations that control it
and entrusted to a single great com
mittee representing the entire people.
Meantime, the all-devouring and
triumphal procession of trusts has
swept across the field of American in.
dustry, and 10, a hundred years more
have vanished, and Mr.. Bellamy and
the select circles that accept him as
their prophet, warn US that in ten
years the American people will have
to choose between plutocracy and
naturalization, and that thanks to the
unintentional work of these monopo-
lies, the close of the nineteenth cen
fury will now witness u complete re-
generation according to the gospel of
socialism.
LEGISLATION, ACTUAL OR PROPOSED.
Let us now consider briefly some
of the actual or proposed Legislation.
The Congressional committee that in
vestigated trusts failed to agree upon
any definite measures, but several of
the States have already put upon their
statute books laws for the suppression
of trusts.
The common principle of all these
laws, as far as l have examined, is to
make unlawful and punish by fines
and forfeitures all combinations for
regulating prices or for limiting the
quantity of products. The State of
Missouri took the lead in this legisla
ton. It's law, in addition to the gen
eral provision just stated, forbids cor
porations to own or issue trust certif-
Gates, and also forbids corporations,
their officers or stockholders to enter
any combination the purpose or effect
of which shall be to place the manage
ment of the combination or of it's
manufactured product in the hands of
trustees with intent to limit prices or
to lessen production or sale. The
Secretary of State is authorized to re-
woke the charter of any corporation
that becomes a member of a trust,
and to guide him in the exercise of
this authority he may require the
proper officer of any incorporated
company doing business in the State
to answer, under oath, whether the
corporation has merged all or any
part of it's business IN any trust. Of
the operation of this law 1 am not in
position to speak definitely. Gov.
Francis, writing soon after its enact,
ment, said that it seemed already to
have broken up some combinations,
and to have prevented the formation
of others that were proposed at the
time Of it's approval. Very similar to
this in their general character were
most of the bills introduced into the
last Congress. Perhaps the most
widely known of these, as it vas one
of the earliest, was the bill offered by
Mr.. Rayner. 1t was aimed against
combinations between corporations or
individuals residing in n State or
Territory with corporations or indi
viduals residing in another State or
Territory, and declared it unlawful
for them, either directly or indirectly
through trustees, to combine any in
~t7rests, franchises or properties Tor
the purpose of affecting or e~qualizing
prices or presenting competition.
Other bills, including that of Sen
ator Sherman, already alluded to,
were still more comprehensive and
minute in their prohibitions, even to
the extent Of imposing evere punish
ment on all who enter into a trust or
like combination.
1t will be noted that all these
measures are very sweeping in their
prohibition of combinations, while the
real offense aimed at is combination
with intent to form m~onopolies. 1t
may be considered whether they can
be successfully enforced, and if so,
whether they may not invade the do
main of liberty or impinge upon what
800 - ooooofaE Nc SO17nH ooo~o~1o