The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-10-31

1 given power by act of Congress TO raise
| the price OF our sugar beyond what 1t
would be II there were no protective duty
| because this is a case In which the
whole physical power OF society Is USED
to advance the interests of some Ameri-
cans at the expense of other Americans
This we said was violation OF the
foundation principle OF the social COM
pact, which rests upon the proposition
that the laws shall bear equally upon
all men. and that no man shall be ale
lowed to use them to his advantage and
to the presudioe OF his fellow-citizens.
But. we said. there is no diff
ference whatever. between such cor
porations as the Standard OIL
Company and the American To-
] bacco Company and any other corpora
tions. except that the two former have
| been enormously successful and have be-
come enormously rich. and yet these are
associated in the public mind with
trusts" and are denounced as such, and
as institutions that are menace TO
common right. We said then, that the
real point Of this fight against institu-
tons Ike these was a fight against the
principle Of incorporation, and we asked
II il would be a wise thing for the laws
TO limit the sphere of interpretations or
the amount OF money which they might
accumulate. This was the point which
we wished to bring forward for discus
sion. and we expressed the very decided
opinion that IL would be an evil day for
mankind when the laws attempted to do
this We did not argue therefore, that
there were good trusts and bad trusts"
Our point was that the popular clamor
against trusts" was in danger of de-
priving society OF its most important
agent for making progress.
The Tobacco journal says: Every
body will readily concede the right of
men to form co-partnerships in business.
but when they organize grinding, fleec-
ing monopolics. they go good bit too
far" We can by no means concede
the consequences of this proposition In
the sense intended by the Tobacco Jour
nal. If any association of men secure
an act from the Legislature-either Con-
gress or state Leeislatures7by which ii
is enabled TO extort money for its own
benefit from its fellow-citizens. we are
ready to join with the Tobacco Journal
in denouncing that as an enemy 10 the
rest OF us that should be destroyed. so
far as the repeal of such a law would
destroy il. But IL an association of
men become very rich by their own un-
aided efforts. and with no act Of the
Legislature TO aid them in their efforts.
we cannot concede that il goes good
bit too far" because it succeeds In
practically. and, perhaps. only Temporal
rily. monopolizing the business that ii
has devoted itself to. and imposes its
own terms upon those who deal with IT.
The association does no more than reap
the reward of its own good manage
ment industry. and enterprise and it
is entitled to that reward. If its success
has been due to its own unaided efforts
alone. The field is open. and If it makes
undue profits. other rival enterprises viii
be certain to spring up to reduce those
profits to a scale commensurate with
the risk involved in the business. That
sort OF monopoly, therefore, is not one
TO which The Times can offer any oppo-
sition. II is a monopoly which every
business man, and every partnership of
business men are continually struggling
TO attain to in the business they conduct,
and the whole incentive to successful
business would be taken away from
men unless they were permitted TO in
dulge their dreams of great wealth and
success, which ultimate control of their
field of business would bring them. 1t
is the monopoly protected by the law
that is TO be condemned. but the monop-
oily secured by thrift is TO be encouraged
The Tobacco Journal says the Ameri-
can Tobacco Company has used means
to forward its ends that The Times "will
not dare TO defend" 1t is no part of
The Times business TO defend the Amer
lean Tobacco Company or any Of its
means of conducting its affairs. The
Times discusses principles and not par
ties, and it makes no reference to the
American Tobacco Company. except as
it may illustrate a principle with il. We
suppose, however the Tobacco Journal
refers to the contract the American To-
bacco Company requires Of those who
handle its goods-that they shall handle
the goods Of no other concern. and shall
sell their goods at the price fixed by the
Tobacco Company. We have no difn-
Guilty whatever about defending this con-
tract The goods are the property OF
tho American Tobacco Company. and ii
can refuse TO sell them at all or sell
2 them on whatever terms suit II best
We see nothing whatever in this matter
TO censure or condemn 1t for. There
is no law compelling any one TO buy
these goods If the people don't want
them, or don't wish TO pay the price
asked, they are free TO let them severely
alone.
GENERAL IONGSTREEr DISCLATals.