Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-01-23
TIE INWARDNESS OF TRUSTS,

many picture them to be. One can say
tina much without being the apologist,
or subscribing to the dogma that no great
enterprises can be perfected without con-
centration of capital. Yet when the gov
crnment advances the capital it is looked
upon as a wise application of money if
the general interests be subserved. But
# a combination or collective body of men
contribute or supply the funds the owner
ship of The enterprise is stigmatized as a
trust. This brings US to the genesis of
trusts.
No one is quite so reckless as to assert
that the law can or should prevent an in
ness of any other individual or mpan
of individuals. Nor can anyone reason
ably deny that if a law cannot prevent an
individual from buying the plant or busi-
ness OF another, it will not nor cannot
prevent him from buying the plants and
business of five hundred individuals, firms
or corporations, if such individuals, firms
or corporations see fit to sell to him. In
q word a mans right to buy one plant or
business carries with it the right to buy
as many plants or businesses as he can
pay for. No one will deny this PROPOSE
ton.
If these premises be sound, and no one
will challenge them, does it not seem a
very difficult task to prevent the fornpa-
ton Of combines or trusts to control
plants or businesses of any kind, no mat
ter whether one man or a dozen men be
the controlling power. Let us Illustrate.
We will say John Smith purchases every
copper mine and smelters in the world, in
Guiding the great Anaconda, the marvel
lous United Verde and the old steady
paying standby, the Calumet and Hecla.
John Smith is only exercising a recognized
right. But say a dozen Smiths, Jones and
Browns pool their cash and buy the prop
: erty, where is the law to prevent them so
doing? Some one Our antitrust
law. Very well. How will the law be en-
forced? There comes the rub. Can a law
I be enforced which deprives one man or a
dozen men from enjoying a natural right?
Can a law be framed which will deprive a
I man or set of men of the property he or
e they have acquired by the exercise of a
V natural or God-given right? If so how can
: it be framed? Mind you the motives which
S ~actuate a man or company of men to pos
t sess himself or themselves of certain
properties, are not on trial; it is the act
itself we are speaking about.
OF course when a company or corpora
ton possesses itself of the properties al
n luded to, or any other kind of properties
the people will rise up as one man and cal
: it a trust, denounce it as a trust and ap-
: peal to the antitrust laws to "bust VI the
e Internal thing But how is it to be done
e The fact is it cannot be done, for any law
or laws which are Intended to prevent con.
solidation of interests in any branch OF
l. branches of business must either fail ant
become a dead letter upon our statute
lie books, or deprive every individual of hi
natural right to buying more than on,
property of the same kind. Though pub
e lie sentiment hanged Jesus Christ, no pub
l. lie sentiment can be created in this age o
IS reason to enforce such an evidently un
d just and unnatural law. And there you
IS have it. In view of it what can be don,
h to prevent the organization of syndicates
y combines, or trusts, if that be the bette
le name, to control any one or all the plants
1t businesses, patents and their good will
re in the country, or in the world?
There are men in this community VIII
confess to no surprise respecting the re