The Advocate and news., 1899-03-08

n CURRENT DISCUSSION /
ILL., Truststhe Good and Evil in Their Development. By
Professor Edward w. Bemis.


nous work Of Henry d. Lloyd on Wealth
versus Commonwealth" An interesting
story is told OF that book. One of the
most famous professors OF economics In
this country told me, as an Illustration of
the condition of the development of polit-
ical economy, that in the institution in
which he was in charge of economies
he was arguing the subject of railroad
determinations, and discussing the effect
in building up trusts He said that hith-
ertO, in his previous lectures, he had al
ways referred the students to the books
in the library bearing on the subject. On
this occasion he wished to refer to the
famous work Of Henry d. Lloyd, but
could not for before him was the son Of
one Of the Standard Oil trustees. This
professor told me that he felt it would not
do to even name Henry d. Lloyd's book
as being in the library, and therefore he
was obliged to forego any reference to
books bearing ON the subject He passed
1t over with the mere reference that If
they were interested in the subject they
would find well-known books in the Ii
brary.
We may come to the same conclusion
that Mr.. Lloyd has reached himself, al
though he did not exactly say as much in
his book About two years ago the
chairman of a certain committee of con-
gress, on some subject connected with
combines and trusts, wrote Mr.. Lloyd
asking him to suggest bill on the sub
ject. Mr.. Lloyd replied to him that he
had no bill to suggest; that the country
was not yet ready for solution of the
trust problem but nevertheless 1t is very
important to study the situation, for the
country will be ready for 1t in time.
There are two classes of monopoly in
this country Monopolies of situation are
one kind. These get their peculiar char
acter from their location. There is hardly
room in the streets of city for more
than one series of gas mains, more than
one street railway system, more than one
telephone or electric light plant; duplica-
tiOn Of service Is annoying to the people.
The same thing is largely true Of the tel
egraph system throughout the United
States, and with the railroad system in
any particular section of the country
The other kind, which leads to the trust
problem, consists of combines Of large
capital. Monopolies of situation and
mOnopolies Of large capital are distinct.
We have before us, then, The subject Of
these great combines Of capital, such as
the oil trust, sugar trust, the steel rail
trust, etc. Again, as we enter into the
subject we notice two meanings Of the
word trust as applied to these combines
Of capital. One is the strictly legal name.
Among lawyers the word trust" has
technical meaning which Is not as broad
as the way in which the word is used by
the mass of the people or among econo-
mists. Among lawyers we mean by
trusts" combinations Of corporations,
where each corporation retains its indi-
viduality but puts its stock in trust with
a central body, and for this purpose each
corporation surrenders its stock for the
time being to central body of trustees
and receives in return trust certificates.
This does not mean the absolute destTuc-
tiOn of the corporation but as a matter
Of fact the central corporation may close
up the entire plant of many OF the cor
porations which are not efficient and con-
Centrate the business in other corpora
tiOns which are more efficient. OF late
the courts have been attacking those
forms Of combination because OF the laws
on the subject prohibiting them. the sub
ordinate corporations, which had COM
bined to form the central corporation, |
which is the trust, go out of business.
They have accomplished the same thing
in a different way. They have simply |
given up the subordinate corporations en-
tirely, destroyed the stock in them and |
formed one great corporation. It is prac-
tiNol1Vy hho coV Hhfnor nc hoqOhn
and legally 1t is no longer a
trust. It is something which is as pow
erful, in fact somewhat more powerful.
There is no longer the Standard Oil trust,