Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-04-16
Nv Thomas G. Sherman.

combinations commonly, tnoueH 81
roneouslv called Trusts" have been
so effectively demonstrated in detail,
by previous articles in this series, that
no better statement of them could now
be made. The evil is universally &C
knowledged by members OF all par
ties, Republicans as much as Demo-
Gratis or Populists. The real and only
question is the ancient one: nat
are you going tddo about it,
More Restrictions Will Not XIII
Trusts.
The very foundation principle OF
these trust combinations is restriction.
Probably on the theory that fire must
always be fought with fire, every ef-
fort thus far made by legislatures to
destroy the power of so-called trusts
has been in the form of still further
restrictions. One restriction is piled
upon another, and still third upon
both; and in this way it is somehow
hoped that liberty will be established
by multiplying restraints upon hDer-
tv. The commerce and trade OF the
country are tied up with chains by the
trust-monopolies; and then Congress
and the legislatures seek to nullify the
effect of these chains by claiming the
chains. 1t is seriously proposed to
restore free competition by prohibiting
INSTRUMENTATION from entering into
competition. Laws have been passed
for the avowed purpose of preventing
combinations which control two-thirds
of the production of any article, from
selling their goods in competition with
the producers of the remaining third.
It is no cause for wonder that all the
so-called antitrust laws have resulted
in ignominious failure, and that the
number of trust-combinations never
increased so rapidly as since the laws
were enacted.
There is but one remedy for slavery,
and that is liberty. There is but one
remedy for monopoly, and that is to
set free those currents which have
been restrained by monopoly. No
combination can ever be permanently
successful unless it is founded upon
some monopoly of natural resources.
In very rare cases such a monopoly
is founded upon the extraordinary
genius of one or two men. For this
there is, and ought to be, no remedy.
Nature makes it impossible that such
a monopoly of genius should last more
than a few years; and during that
period it's benefits will far outweigh
all it's disadvantages. Genius may
have an occasional monopoly; but no
pne could have long monopoly in gen.
ius. Nature is sure to produce rival
genius, who does in another way what
the first genius did in his own peculiar
way. This was strikingly illustrated
in the history of the steel manufacture.
Bessemer having invented one i'm
mensely valuable and cheap process
for making steel, Siemens followed
with another method, and Gilchrist
and Thomas with still another.
The great monopolies of this coun-
try owe their existence to special I'M
Just privileges, conferred upon them by
a course of unjust legislation, which
the people of the United States
adopted of their own free will, and
which are still maintained by the votes
of the very people who most loudly
declaim against monopolies. Foremost
among these are the tariff laws, the
internal revenue laws and the patent
laws We shall briefly consider these
in the order of the least important.
Patent Law "a Monopoly.
Taking first the patent laws, which
avowedly concede monopoly for the
term of seventeen years, for good and
solid reasons in each case, we have
only to say that they afford striking
illustration of the dangers attendant
upon any legalized monopoly, however
meritorious. This is shown by a COM
paratively recent scandal, with regard
to a pretended conflict of claims in
the patent Office. Two opposing claims
were secretly purchased by ono COM
bination, which afterwards employed
attorneys on both sides to keep up
the sham contest for many years. re-
sulting in practical monopoly of a
single invention for thirty years, in
stead of seventeen. BY similar man.
ipulations, other valuable inventions
are monopolized for a much longer
time than the law intends; while
many others are simply locked up and
kept out of public use entirely. The
patent laws need a thorough revision,
all in the direction of greater liberty.
AS we do not propose to discuss de-
tails on this occasion, we cohfine our
self to saying that these laws should
be so amended as to make it impos-
sible for any monopoly to last under
it for more than seventeen years from
the date of the application for a pat
ent, and so as to permit the use by
everybody of all patented inventions