The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-03-21
FROM VARIOUS STAND
POINTS.
(New York Journal.)

there is a very interesting symposium ON
'the question of trusts" and ''how much
public control is possible or necessary"
The contributors are John B. Clark, Pro-
fessor of Political Economy in Columbia
University, who writes ON TRUSTS and
the Law" Henry ID. Lloyd, the distin-
guished author of Wealth Against Com
mon wealth." who writes on 'TThe Oil
Combination;" G. L. Dodd, attorney for
the Stanard Oil Company, who writes ON
THE War Against Wealth." Professor
r. II. Ely, of the University of Wiscon-
sin, who writes on 1.-The Situation and
the Remedy George Gunton, editor Of
Gunton's Magazine, who writes on
Large Aggregations of Capital" o. X.
Stuart, a Philadelphia manufacturers,
who writes on ",The History of the
Sugar Trust" and Daniel De Leon, editor
of the People newspaper, who writes ON
The Socialist View of the Trust"
Naturally, the opinion expressed by
this company of essayists are as various
as the writers. Professor Clark declares
that antitrust laws have failed of their
objects, and thinks that potential COM
petition is our only safeguard against OPP
preston by the combinations. Mr.. Lloyd
gives a brief account of the Standard Oil
Company in the course of which he says
the present value of the trust is over
S225. 900, 900, all created out of nothing"
in thirty years, besides the enormous pro-
fits in dividends all that time. The men
who did this had no capital to start with,
according to Mr.. Lloyd, and for a long
period had less capital than their COM
petitors, whom they drove, one after an
other, out of business. The secret of their
success in enriching themselves, Mr.
Lloyd tells us, and in running everybody
else in the business, was their liability
to acquire facilities for transportation, :"
which means that they induced the rail
roads to give them rebates, to put up
price rates for the other oil shippers, and
to pay to the Standard the extortionate
sums collected from its unsuspecting
rivals.
Professor Ely discusses the subject In
a very scholarly and dispassionate man
ner. He says it is useless to continue
to oppose the trusts on the present lines
of opposition because such opposition has
not accomplished anything. The remedy,
in his opinion, as public ownership of
businesses which are monOpolistic in their
character and their management by pub
lie agents in the interests of society"
He finds a growing tendency to look at
government in new way and general
idea that 1.-THE evolution of society has
made the old idea of simple government
inapplicable to present conditions" He
is in favor of more nearly apportioning
taxation according to ability to bear taxa
ton.
Mr.. Gunton assets that ''capitalistic
methods" in the thirty years between
1860 and 1891 caused an average fall
in prices of about 4 per cent and an aver
age rise in wages of 6S per cent, thus in
creasing the purchasing power of days
work slightly more than y per cent.
The tendency toward aggregations of
capital in productive enterprise is "econo-
mically sound, socially advantageous and
necessary to modern progress" because
trusts Improve the quality and reduce
the price of commodities; they are more
favorable than smaller concerns to an
increase in wages: by. introdncinp sninr+;
nc precision into industry they tend to
increase the permanence of employment
and reduce the tendency to industrial de-
preston" Therefore "all the influences
of society should be made to support"
the trusts, except, of course, when they
are mere agreements to raise press. This
line of defence is followed by Mr. Stuart.
He italicizes his belief that there's must
be check to competition" which forces
merchants to advertise. AS the trust
checks competition it can sell it's product
with the least possible effort and ex-
pense" AS it destroys the necessity for
alu icfn WI off md do
city, the trust is mot only a conservator
of energy and of wealth, it is conser-
vator of morals and religion
Mr.. Dodd also points out the benefits
of trusts in general and of the Standard
Oil Company in particular. The Oil COM
bnatiOn is "a great and beneficial in
dustry.' Opposition to it is based
strange as it may seem, but Mr.. Dodd
says it all in one breath-upon pure in
dividualism'' and also upon ''the general
sociahstic warfare against wealth." Those
who attack trusts believe that prosperity
is only accumulation by spoliation." They
are waging war against character"
They are engaged in "a mad attempt to
create class hatred" From their attacks
1.-THE reputation of no capitalist is safe"
Mr.. Manson's article is only a review Of
various investigations into the Sugar
Trust
The socialist view of trusts, as stated
by Mr.. De Leon, is that the trust is the
highest form of collective development
under the system of private ownership
Of the machinery of production" 1t has
destroyed competition in every industry
into which it has been introduced, and
society has consequently been differen-
tiated into three classes-''the proletarat.
who, no longer able to exercise their labor
function without access to the competition
destroying machinery of production, 'are
reduced to the level of merchandise and
compelled to sell their labor power in the
labor market for a living; the middle
class, who, though armed with tools suf-
fciently powerful to exclude the toolless
class, find it harder and harder to hold
their own in competition with the more
powerful and ever-perfectng tools held
by the class above; and the capitalist
class, who, possessed of the prerequisites