The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-11-06

| Even at the ratio OF rs to your cor
! respondent Is unable TO see the benefit 10
| civilization and progress arising from
4 trusts. DROP IN THE BUCKET.
| November 4, 1896
| Our correspondent meets the issue as
| VIC have said from the beginning. that
| the subject must narrow itself down TO-
| squarely. He admits that he thinks the
] acquisition OF great wealth by corpora
lions. trusts. and monopolies' great
| danger to society. Let US discriminate
| and know just exactly what we are talk
| Ing about. Everybody Is opposed 10 the
| monopolics that get their monorolies by
| the aid of legislation. so that considera-
| ton OF them may be dropped out OF the
| question. There are no such things as
trusts" distinguished from the powerful
| industrial corporations so that what our
! correspondent Is really talking about Is
| the great and wealthy corporations ike
| the Standard Oil Company and the Amer
| lean Tobacco Company. He thinks there
| is danger to society tn permitting these
! TO acquire the wealth which they have
| acquired and are acquiring: so that at last
| we have the discussion narrowed down
| 10 the plane that we have said from the
| beginning Il must finally come 10.
| Now. The Times has no fears whatever
| for society from individuals or corpora
lions growing rich II they acquire their
! wealth by their own unaided efforts ana
with no assistance whatever from the
/ laws. But since our correspondent takes
| a different view. we ask him TO suggest
| the measure by which he would correct
! the evil. Would he take from the stand
| ard Oil Company and the American To-
| bacco Company and other similar corpo-
| ratons a part of what they have ac-
| quired. or would he simply forbid them
| TO acquire any more than they now have
| And would he confne whatever remedial
| legislation he may resort to- TO those
| corporations that he thinks have now ac-
! quircd all they should acquire, or would
| he make a general law providing that
| corporations may acquire a certain sum
| of money. but no more? We think our
| correspondent will find the subject sur
| rounded with unconquerablo difficulties
| when he comes 10 deal with it practi-
| cally. but we should like TO hear his sug-
| gcstions all the same
| our correspondent has certainly made
| out a strong case for those who ten years
| ago dealt i'm tobacco in and about Rich
mond. If the case were the old dealers in
| Company. But that is not the whole case.
| There is another party whose interests
are 10 be considered when this issue is
| being framed, and that is the great pub
| lie. The great public has rights as well
| as the old dealers in tobacco In and
! around Richmond When four of the
agencies that formerly bought tobacco
were closed up. and the various other
small dealers In Richmond had TO go out
| of business. the expenses Of preparing to-
bacco and conveying It to the consumer
| were greatly reduced. and that consumer
| was thereby able to buy his tobacco much
cheaper than he bought II when the old
agencies made living out Of the bust
| ness Who Is the world most interested
| in the three or four hundred persons
! that have been put out of business or the
millions who use tobacco? We DO not
pretend to say that the American To-
| bacco Company has made any great re-
| duction in the price Of cigarettes. and
we are not discussing any particular
| trust or monopoly so-called, nor can we
| discuss any of them, for we do not
| know all the important facts. and we
| doubt If our correspondent does. We are
| only considering a principle and the
| limitations which should be put upon the
aggregation of wealth by industrial cor
| porat!ons.
| That the American Tobacco Company
is not a monopoly is evidenced by the
fact that the National Cigarette Company
is reported TO be an aggressive rival, and
recently TO have bought sixty carloads
! of cigarette tobacco; while the plug bust
| ness of the American Tobacco Company
is said to be a drop in the bucket" of
| the annual output of other concerns.
We insist that with an open field and
no governmental interference, excessive
profits will inevitably provoke rival com
panies. and the only way that rivals
| can be met is by low prices, of which
| the public gets the benefit We say. also,
| that the inevitable economic law OF
| the case is that that company will reduce
| their price to the lowest point that is
| consistent with a reasonable profit TO it.
| self. For the economic law, as sure as
the law Of gravitation, is that a man
| controlling a business will sell his goods
al the lowest prices consistent with q
| profit. because his object is TO make
| money and his sales increase as he re-
great sales at small profits rather than
| from small sales at great profits. The
| reduction may not come this week or the
next. but il surely comes, as the Standard
| oil Company has proven by reducing the
| price of oil from seventy-five cents a gal
| lon 10 fifteen cents a gallon.
our correspondent argues that the deal
| ers that have been put out of business
| are unable thereafter 10 earn a living
| But this suggestion also ignores an in
| fallible economical law. 1t is the argu-
| mcnt of the skilled mechanic. who fights
| ing is clearer than that improvements in
| machinery improve wages and increase
| employments. The reason is that the
| improvements cheaper the articles manu-
! featured. and as things cheaper men use
! more, and they not only use more OF q
| particular article, but they use more
articles also The great blessing OF
progress and civilization is the cheap
ening Of articles, for as they become
cheaper our appetites increase, and we
thus raise up industries TO furnish en-
! pioyment for all the idle.
Our correspondent allows his mind TO
| deal too intently with the Inconvenience
that overlook few individuals, who suf-
fered no more than did stage-owners
when cars were pu; on the track; or for
that matter. horse-owners now are suf-
fering from BICYCLES But he must take