Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-05-19
THE QUESTION OF INDEPENDENCE

THE QUESTION OF INDEPENDENCE
In an agricultural paper published in
St. Louis the governor of Montana pub
fishes an article in opposition to trusts.
Some of his arguments are appropriate
and to the point, but his exceliency makes
one mistake altogether too common in
the discussion Of this phase Of industrial
evolution, He magnifies the question OF
personal independence in the following
language:
But the worst feature of combinations
and trusts is the destruction OF lndlNloual
manhood and independence in thought.
The advocate of trusts must assume one
OF these positions: he must assume to
act and think for others in the control
Of their affairs. or he must assume the
position of allowing others to think ana
act for him. He must be either master
or servant, dictator or fawning, crinslng
sycophant, willing and ready to surrender
to the superior. The present tendency OF
the age is to destroy and root out the
love Of individual liberty, independence
and manhood, and every power possible
ought to be utilized to counteract these
pernicious results.
Probably no one feature of human life
Is rolled over in a more meaningless way
than that of personal independence. The
fact is overlooked that but few if any
can escape the inevitable law of clviliza-
ton that makes US inter-dependent, and
builds up manhood upon the basis of
discipline to establish rules n usages
Industrial independence, in the sense that
each man must think and act for him.
self, can be acquired only by turning
back the wheels of progress to the time
when each man supplied his wi wants
from a shop in the back yard.
When industrial progress made posi-
bic that happy day which brought many
of the luxuries of life within the reach of
the humble and the poor, by cheapening
the processes of their production, man
kind surrendered the hardship Of per-
sonal independence that made him the
manufacturer of whatever his existence
might require. Organized government
implies a sacrifice of personal independ-
ence, and the delegation of the right to
one man to think for another. Law and
order is based on that idea.
In our industrial life the trend is in
evitable, and the trusts and combines OF
capital do not introduce any new fea-
lures affecting the personal independence
of men. The relations of men will re-
1oo;p TIM GO ,n mr. tier, r. W. %olo,, .1--a
being delegated with the functions of
superintendent while others serve as en-
ployes. To get away from this condition
Ito reach that utopian era when every
man is his own boss, in the sense tina
he can think and act for himself and be
Independent OF the will of his fellowmen
the splendid industrial system of mod
ern civilization must be abolished. Each
man must be his own artisan, his owu
manufacturer. his own merchant, his
own doctor, his own lawyer. and-witl
own governor.
That man is indeed a genius who can
in his g~randiloquent perorations on per.
sonal independence and manhood, clearly
indicate where inter-dependence leave:
off and independence begins. The fac
Is, organized society in all it's forms i'm
plies a doing away with what might bt
termed the Independence of the indi
vidua 1t > the price that man pays
for the association of his fellows-his trib
ute to progress and the civilization of thu
world.
Trusts and combinations of capital viii
not change the conditions that now cx
list, insofar as questions of personal in,
dependence are concerned, but will mere,
~ enlarge the army of employees under
one management. There is nothing il
the fact that different industrial enter
prises are associated under one owner
ship that robs the employee of any libert,
of thought and action that he now pos
sesses. Whether a man is working for a,
individual shop owner, a company tina
operates a factory, "a corporation tina
manages a railroad. or a trust that gov.
crns an association of enterprises, h
conforms to the rules and regulations o.
the controlling power-be 1t great o.
swaziland to that extent ceases to thinl