The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-09-16

from reaching that high level It is a
| common. though inaccurate remark, that
| trusts have lowered prices and it is a
| fact that they have not raised them by
more NOR than small fraction Of the amount
! ed to the competitive and natural rate.
1t is the potential competitor who is the
cause OF this Connection that today
| IS latent, but will be active tomorrow if
| the price of an article is raised by per
cent, holds the price as vigorously down
| ton would do.
| Potential competition is capable of be-
| Ing an adequate regulator of prices and
| the striking fact is that if only this kind
| of regulation were as efficient as it prob
! ably might be, the natural level of prices,
Under a regime of trusts, would be lower
| er establishments. The whole great econ
| omy that consolidation insures may be
made to inure to the benefit of the pub
lie, if only potential competitor does it's
normal work. Trusts with the element CT
true monopoly taken out might be-
come as popular as they now are unpop-
IN which they should be most numerous
a decisive advantage in the struggle for
| the trade of the world.
| what would the total extinction of
trusts mean? 1t would mean security
bought at the cost of wastefu production.
What would the full DEVELOPMENT of
ton mean? 1t would mean a perverted
distribution, with extortionate profits for
a few, and burdens for many. 1t would
! mean state from which many a man
| to whom the picture Of state socialism is
| now terrifying spectre would even be-
! gin to turn to socialism itself as the
| mere tolerable system.
Are these the only alternatives" Far
| from 1t. better one is III part realized.
| Trusts are large checked by potential
| competition, and may be checked far
me re efficiently than they nnw are. The
| type Of law making that promises to
secure this, and Is as yet unknown to
| the practical world. The principle on
which it rests is an old AMI fundamental
! principle of common law. Monopolies are
against public interest; and trusts must
not survive if that means retaining the
| monopolistic power. Courts. acting under
| common law, have done not little In
| enforcing this principle, and statutes may
help them Statutes well emf, enforced 1h may
! the statutes be? Here l shall encounter
| objection and dissent. The evil power OF
a trust rests almost entirely on its power
! to make discriminating prices. 1t can
| do many things that are evil; but it could
| do almost none of them If it was forced
| to treat all It's customers alike.
| ''At present q trust can make rulnouS-
| ly low prices in one small area, where
some competitor Is operating, While sus-
| tanning itself by profit made in twenty
| other areas where it has full possession
| of the market If 1t were under the single
necessity of making one price for al
buyers, it would ruin itself by an attempt
! to compete in the cut-throat way as
quickly as it would ruin competitor.
There is much to be said in the elab-
grafton of the plan of action that L here
| suggest in a way that is too meager TO
earn for it an adequate hearing. 1t would
| require a Federal law. and possibly an
| amendment to the Federal constitution
| 1t would require for efficiency commits
sion endowed with far greater power
than most bodies of this kind possess It
would require vigorous prosecution OF
! the work that our people meant TO en-
| trust to the interstate commerce commas
! sion. and the suppression of corrupt
| dealings between favored producers ana
! common carriers. 1t would require the
| overcoming of many prejudices. L claim
! the immunities of a theoretical student
of the subject when [ enter the realm
| of prophecy. and declare that strange as
| a policy may now seem that depends on
| fostering the surviving competition by
| the single means of enforcing uniform
prices. it is the coming policy DISCUS
| that direction. but practical evolution Is
so, and twenty years, if not shorter
period. will suffice to make this fact clear.
We shall have the trust forever. The
| economy that it interested in its plan OF
production will save 1t. We shall not
have more than trace OF monopoiy,
strange today, but will seem natural
when experience shall be ripper. the full
benefit of competition will be secured DS
the purchasing public and the wage
| ent type of competition will be avoided,
and yet the protection that 1t a1torqs VIII
| be retained ne poo9IoiliOS " nc IL
| trusts without having true monopohea
| will make socialism unnecessary.
ORGANIZED LABOR.
! Samuel Gompers, president OF the
American Federation of Labor. said;
! cit has been said that organized labor
| is a trust, and l want to say in connec-
| ton with this that to our minds that Is
| an absolute missioner. Organized laO0ts
| throws open its doors to all who work
| for wages and ask them to come IN ana
| share in the benefits. You cannot preaK
| into trust. -
1--WE have seen the enactment OF the
law known as the antitrust law, ana the
law known as the interstate commerce
law supposed to be enacted for the pene-
fit of the people, and yet the only praC!
teal use of these laws has been TO steal
away from us the right of trial by Jury
and to imprison workmen for conspiracy
AS a matter of fact wherever the work,
ers are organized. and have maintained
their organizations, their. wages are
higher and hours less and conditions bet
ter, in spite of the combinations OF capl-
tai. ...,t .frs l.,s.sl.. it,,
I'm the midst of greater concentrations
of wealth. and the vast development o.
Industry. it behooVes the workers 70
more ceaselessly than ever devote their
energies to organized labor. and counter
act the effect which their helpless ana
unprotected condition would otherwise
have upon them.
Mr. ComnerS was loudly applauded.