Sistersville oil review. [volume] (Sistersville, W. Va.) 1896-1901, 1898-02-23

1919 " pun ~ (ANASAA 49, He-NNNSS
action in legislation to the trusts
and combinations that have been
actively forming of recent years in
so many of the manufacturing in
dustries of the country that has
not been noted in the hot discussion
of and general hostility to them,
but which is worth attention as in
dicating both the real source OF hos
.ility and the> cure. The popular
conception OF a trust is an organiza-
ton which takes in all or a control
ling number of the establishments
in any line of industry for the pnr-
pose of throttIing competition and
putting the consumers of its prod
ucts at the mercy of the promoters
by enabling the latter to fix abso,
lutely extortionate prices. Against
this the gorge rises instinctively,
and the frequency with which some
of the trusts have acted on this con-
cept justifes the popular idea OF
them and their purposes, aud war
rants the hostility of them all shown
in legislation as we'll as public eX,
preston.
Again, we have one class of trusts
that are active in securing legisla-
ton that will aid them in con-
trolling the mark cts, either by
shutting out or impeding foreign
competition, such as the sugar
trust. the late nail and rail and
billet trusts. and the instructive
sense of freedom and equality, in
herent in every true American, re-
volts at both the thing and its means
and methods. There is strange
contradiction in the legislation that
in one direction antagonlzes and
in another fosters these trusts. Just
now the sugar trust is the storm
center of public denunciation. and
opinion, at loss to account for the
motive that leads the senate to in
crease its capacity to exo1t and to
reconcile it with the motive that
| lead to the enactment OF the anti
trust law, falls back upon vcnallty
as the only plausible one. The fact
probably is that the senators lind
the m selves confronted with the
duty to enforce a party principle
on the one side and with the result
of that policy on the other, and no
avenue of escape. They must give
prote ,tion to sugar refining as an
industry, and, if they do, it will en-
able tie trust to eXtort unjust prof
its; but there is no middle ground,
within the party, for them to take
But there are trusts and trusts.
If one scans the expressions OF
opinion, he will find that indlgna'
ton and denunciation are directed
against only a few of these numer-
ors traGc rnu.,inations. He will
be surprised tina other trusts pursue
their way in a cAlnly, receiving no
notice, attractive no attention, IN
citino no indie proceedings. He
will find, on ex ,nination, that their
purpose is to control markets, TX
prices, bar competition, identical
with the objects of those which are
in the very storm center. He sees
trust monopolizing tue limited fields
of supply, absolute master OF the
market, extenu.Ag its operations to
foreign couu ries and negotiating
treaties Of rlity with its chief com,
petitors there, dividing the world
with them, and still nowhere does
he hear or read Of popular opposl'
ton. The echoes of The fierce storm
that ragged about it rs years ago
have all died away. 1t holds in its
absolute grasp the oil trade OF the
nation; fixes despotically the price
for every gallon of oil; has enor,
mously enriched its members, and
yet there is no opposition to it any
where. This fact is significant. 1t
indicates that the hostility to trusts
is not to the organization per
Sc, but to its methods and
purposes; not to the control of the
market, but to the use made
of that control; not to the power to
fix prices, but to the manner OF ex'
ercise of that power. If one were
to examine the cause of public
quiescence to the rule of the Stand
ard Oil trust he would find it in the
single fact Of the common belief that
the prices made for its products are