The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-08-31

| Ink You bOmeWhht misdppfohentot NY
position. | didn't mean TO say that be-
cause n manufacturer buys up oil the ma
tergl used in his line OF business bis prop
eTty should not be protected. nor did | In
tend t. make the assertion that what would
be right for one man 20 do would be wrong
if done by a combination OF men. nor can
find anything IN my first letter TO warrant
such conclusion. The point intended to
make was that n monopoly created by the
patronage OF the people with healthy
competition was right, but monopoly
created by the cutting oil of competition
! WAS wrong.
You take the ground that it is impossible
TO create a monoDoly by the cutting on OF
com petition. Has not the great Sugar
| Trust created such, monopoly! And why
| was this trust createdy BY making q conf
bination of oil the sugar rehners IN the
| United States. can't you see how the re-
fners would be benefited and at whose eX-
pense? They can buy the raw material at
their own price. they can sell the refined
| article at their own price. Thew do now
| not only sell at their own price. but thew
fix the price at which jobbers must sell in
al the different cities and towns. This
! trust has been III existence tor some time.
! and the only cause of its existence that
can sec has been that II might control tho
! price Of sugar. IL remains 10 be seen what
| this rival which has appeared on the field
! can DO If not very strong II will be alb
sorbed OF crushed by the mighty power "
| the present organization.
The fear of possible competition has
caused the Standard Oil Company to keep
| the lprice of oil down, which has been for
the benefit Of the buyers you say. Well, II
| tho fear of competition has had such bene-
fetal effect, what effect would competition
itself have Don't you see in this how this
principle of competition works. With our
10 harr al l,rra 70. 10
of competition with the outside world
there is such thing as monopolles created
by cutting of competition, and these mo-
nopolies use their power 20 enrich them
selves at the expense of the people.
These companies make II oney, there is no
doubt of that, and they cut of competition
as the Standard Oil Company is now doing
Very truly yours,
W. S. II.
created by the patronage Of the people
with healthy competition is right. but
a monopoly created by the cutting of Of
competition is wrong
Ia there not confusion Of terms here
One cannot have a monopoly whilst he has
competitor. The idea of a monopoly is that
one person or set OF persons has it all.
There cannot be therefore "a monopoly
created by the patronage of the people with
a healthy competition" The moment tie
business has reached the point that a mo-
nopoly has arisen. healthy competition has
ended. Healthy competition" is a stage
through which business must pass before it
reaches the state of monopoly, but when it
has reached that state healthy competi-
ton is left behind and it has the whole
field to itself.
The question which confronts our CORES
pondent then. is this: Is war to be made
upon a business heretofore lawful and
beneficial merely because it has grown 10
such proportions that it is able to outstrip
and excel all rivals and have the field
wholly TO itself? If it is then the principle
of sscredness in property is abandoned and
we may logically make war on all rich men
as the enemies of mankind.
THE TINES thinks such a proposition
wrong in principle and bad political econ
omy. THE TINES thinks that if our cor
respondent and all who think with HIM
will only trust TO the fixed laws of trade,
rivals will spring up against the monopolist
just as soon as he makes profits out Of the
business that tempts them. Having de-
scribed the monopoly which he thinks
right. our correspondent describes the
monopoly which he thinks wrong. and this
is one created by the cutting of of CON-
petition"
y by this our correspondent means a mo- |
nopoly that grows up during a period when
statute law forbids competition. AS the pro-
tectiye tariff does, we are entirely with him. |
But we are sure this is not what he means !
We are sure he means 10 object to what ne
calls monopoly which by its own force
and with no aid whatever from statute law /
oyercomes all rivals. And if this, as we |
have no doubt is what he means, we are /
to differ with him in toto, and for
the reasons that we have already given. Il |
the monopoly is one which the manufac-
turer Of shoe backing has established by |
his own thrift and enterprise. with no aid /
from a statute law made to confer |
special privileges upon him, we insist he |
has the right so far TO surpass all rivals as /
to cut of all competition, if he is able TO !
do so by his own superior energy and
sense; and if statute law comes in and pre-
vents him from doing this statute law is
used to deprive a citizen of his property
that he he's lawfully acquired and chaos
and anarchy will have set in. As for
the sugar monopoly and oil monopoly
we have already pointed out that they arc
putting the price of sugar and
oil down, and they must keep that price
down to a point when their profits are
no more than reasonable or competitors
will at once spring up.
In the United States Supreme Court in
Loan Association against Topeka GO Wal
ace's Reports Justice Miller said
To lay with one hand the power of