The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-08-29

and common stock.
1T is believed that the preferred
stock represents more in value than
the property purchased, and that the
common stock usually has no real 3as
is of value. Those who sell their
plants or stock to these enterprises, the
glloed-tongued promoters who launch
the scheme and the persuasive bankers
VINO float the stock of the over-capital-
lied venture, are the ones who reap
the harvest, while the gullible ones Of
the pubic who invest in the stock are
the losers,
The states have made their laws
more explicit than the act of congress.
Nearly all of them have some form of
law furnishing trusts, pools or combn-
alons, and during the last year the
states of Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas,
michigan, Missouri, New York, North
carolina and Texas have by amend
ments made their laws more sweeping
IN terms and more severe in penalties.
In considering the course of state
legislation on the subject of combina-
lions, one cannot but be struck with
some inconsistencies that can only be
explained by the necessities of politics.
When it is considered that labor cost is
the very large percentage of everything
mat is made and sold, it'seems strange
there should be no inhibition upon or
CARNATIONS that exercise a complete
and monopolistic control of about all
the trades and exist to maintain the
price of wages or to increase tam.
we read no enactment and hear no
pronunciation of combinations that, by
most drastic methods, frequently bring
IN widespread ruin in their train and
add largely to the cost of both the con-
Veniences and necessaries of life. Stat
uteS AFFORD many strange contrasts, but
none more remarkable than this-that
combinations may exist and be fostefed
10 advance to the consumer the cost
OF labor, but organizations to advance
the price of the finished article are to
be punished with severity. The recon-
cling of these inconsistencies and the
attempted enforcement of the state
laws solving the most absorbing prob
lens will be watched with the most in
tense interest. The earnest hopes of
every patriot will be that those who
Write the law, those who construe its
meaning and those who enforce it will
be guided by the light that will come
from calm, deliberate investigation, and
not be swayed by the catch phrases of
the political demagogue
Edward Q. Keasbey of Newark, N. j.,
read a paper on New Jersey and the
great corporations. Mr.. Keasbey out
lined the chief characteristics of legis-
lation in New Jersey under which these
corporations were chartered. He said:
The fact remains that the legislation
against trusts and combinations as con
spiracies fails to reach the corporations
already organized, however large they
may be or however large a part of the
trade they may control It is just here
that the policy of New Jersey is differ
ent from that which seems to prevail in
lNeNrr fNf e.t,,
Jersey, it has been held that in a col
lateral proceeding the court of chan
Gerry has no power to restrain a corpora
ton organized under the forms of law
from performing acts within its corpo-
rate power merely because the purpose
of its Incorporation may have been TO
prevent competition and establish a
monopoly, and in very recent case in
the court OF errors, it has been held that
although contracts in restraint of COM
petition in the production of some COM
modify in the production and sale of
which the public have an interest are
contrary to public policy, yet when such
agreements result in the formation of
corporation with the powers conferred
under the liberal statutes Of New Jer-
sey, it may lawfully buy the business of
its competitors and the courts cannot
pronounce a contract for such permit
ted purchases invalid although it may
tend to produce, and may temporarily
produce a monopoly
The conditions of trade and manufac-
ture are very different from what they
have been. The extent of the territory
that can be profitably occupied has be-
come much greater and larger under
takings can now be more easily con-
trolled under a single management.
The great combinations of capital are
new, ana there has not yet been time
to ascertain by experience what is the
actual effect of uniting many enterpris-
es for the purposes of reducing the cost
of production and regulating the prices
of commodities.
The obvious effect is to reduce COM
petition and it is competition that has
been the ruling force in the struggle
for existence in the commercial and in
dustrial world. 1t was supposed to be
competition alone that prevented men
from asking more for their products
than they were worth and this being
removed, there seems to be nothing to
restrain the capacity of those that con-
troll any industry; but the natural pro-
gress of production is from competition
to combination and from combination
to cooperation. We have reached the
second stage, but have not yet had eX-
perience of the effects of combination
on large scale. Nor do We know
whether in the removal of, competition
there may come the saving of ill-direct-
ed energy, theregulation of supply in ac-
cordance with the demand both in place
and in time, q saving in the cost of
production and a steadiness and a GER
tainty of industrial effort and result
and the command of all the capital
needed for any useful enterprise, AMI
that out of all these there will not come
an increase of actual wealth, wider
distribution of it among the people as
stockholders in the general corporations
and decrease of the cost of commodi-
ties to the individual man.
There are grave dangers in the new
condition and it is well that the courts
are alert to guard against them, and
are jealous to defend the people against
the rapacity of the rich and powerful
but in most matters of business it is
safer to let the people take care of
themselves rather than for the courts
to interfere with liberty of contract
and the natural course of trade. If
combinations of capital become too
large to be managed with safety and
profit they will fail. If they serve a
useful purpose and are in accordance
with the laws of social development
they will go ON. and the courts will be
powerless to stop them. 1t is the right
and duty of the courts to refuse to
sanction contracts that are plainly OPP
posed to public policy, but is a power
not to be exercised without strong rea-
sons and only after the most careful
consideration of the facts which go to
prove what the best public policy really
Is. 1t is not enough to follow the pub
lie opinion of the day, nor even to ac-
cept judicial opinion of former time.
The question must be examined anew
from time to time as conditions change
and in view of latest experience and tn,
best opinion of experts in social science
and of practical men of affairs.
ASK ASSISTANCE.