Marietta daily leader. (Marietta, Ohio) 1895-1906, 1899-03-05
.,sSs.essSe .estjt SsjsjsJsJsssJ
y A Preacher :
~. Among the People. !,

FOR AND AGAINST TRUSTS.

OF trusts. Notwithstanding the ract
that many people look upon preacher
as a man whose sole business Is to d.
rect benighted souls to celestial reg
ions beyond the grave. l have been
much interested in that discussion.
1t may be looked upon as presumptous
ON the part OF one who Is supposed to
have knowledge of heavenly things on
ly, to venture an opinion concerning
matters that pertain to material we'll
being; but shall say my say and abide
by the consequences. -
When the Attorney General Of one Of
the greatest states In .ne Union de-
clares state. officials have allowed
their powers to remain dormant until
the rumblings of the masses and the
red flames of anarchy have almost
threatened our destruction In times OF
financial Distress 1t is time for serious
minded people to try to think clearly
and act wisely.
Looking at the social problem from
my standpoint, two very distinct ten
dencies are to be seen, and as l have
listened to the discussions conducted
on our streets, IN our Offices and stores
during the last week, have been per-
suaded that these two marked tenden-
cies are not clearly defined in the
minds of many business men. For In
stance, men who would be much Of
Tended to be classed as socialists, have
been heard loudly advocating princi-
pies which, II pressed to their logical
conclusion woul result In downright
socialism. The socialist contends that
the principle of competition Is wrong,
that in the very nature OF things 1t re-
suits in commercial murder, because 1t
grants a man the right to cut the bus
mess throat OF his competitor In order
to enhance his own success. Social
istic literature has recorded inummer-
able and most pathetic incidents
wherein the weaker has been crushed
by the stronger and helpless women
and children thereby reduced to star
vation. The conclusion of course is
that the social millennium will be much
nearer at hand when brutal competi-
ton" is destroyed by turning the bust
ness of produolngand distributing over
to single management.
Now, as far as the destruction of
competition is concerned the socialist
and the trust advocates are agreed
TO that extent both are seeking pre-
cisely the same end. The point at
which they diverge is IN the matter of
management. The socialist admits
the trust advocates contention that
the business ofproducing and distribute
ing CAN be carried on at reduced
cost by means of great combinations,
but contends that II the management
is left in the hands Of private individ-
uals, ambitious to enrich themselves
at the expense of the general public,
it WILL NOT BE; LAT a few men,
having monopoly upon any given
commodity, will arbitrarily set the
price to suit themselves. Many facts
can be produced in support Of this lat
ter claim.
OF course, the socialists conclusion
as that the management should be put
into the hands Of the state. The only
real contention between the trust ad-
uocates an dthe socialist today is con-
cerning the management. Both be-
lieve in combination, and both seek to
destroy competition. The one, how
ever, says that the state should be the
manager and thus insure fair distri-
button Of the profits among the people;
while the other contends that 1t is his
rightto conduct the management and
put the profits into his individual
pocket AS to the righteousness OF
this contention, the people themselves
will quickly decide, once they get the
matter clearly fixed in their minds.
To argue that few private individuals
have the right, and should be granted
the power to hold the millions in eco
nomic bondage is not in keeping with
comon sense, and yet that is exactly
what would follow the complete des-
truction OF the competitive principle
unless the state should step In and
take control 1t is not fair to say that
4 man who stands out In defense of a
corporation that has practically sue
ceeded in crushing out all its competi-
tors is a socialist; but 1t Is fair to say
that in approving its course he prac-
tically rejects the principle of compe-
tition, and 1t is difficult to see where
ne can find logical standing ground
this side OF the socialists position. II
the principle OF competition is right,
then the trust is radically and hope
lessly wrong, and should be vigorous
ly opposed. If on the other hand the
principle OF competition is wrong then
the trust is right, and the only ques-
ton to be settled is as to whether pri-
vate individuals or the state shall con-
stitute the management.
As indicated a moment ago, the
question of the management Is mat
ter about which there can scarcely be
two opinions once 1t Is decided that
combining for the purpose of destroy
ing competition is right. The trust is