The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-10-25
THE TRUST PROBLEM
THERE Is A LABOR TRUST AS
WELL AS A CAPITAL TRUST.
Trades Unions Endeavor to Create
Monopoly by Various Methods.
What Will People Who Be-
long to Neither DoP

Inc QucSIlOHS, what ID q uuSIt anu
what are the evils Of trusts? are getting
very concrete answer In the present
coal strike. In this strike two trusts
one of labor. the other of capital-are en-
gagged In a bitter struggle. and because
of this struggle between these two trusts
the people of the Atlantic seaboard are
in imminent peril Of a calamitous coal
famine.
In 1882 a number of petroleum refiners
in Pennsylvania formed an organization
in which the separate refining corpora
tons were unRed by a very simple expe-
dent. without abandoning their corporate
existence. A majority Of the stock OF
each corporation was given to body OF
control of each OF these corporations, and
enabled them to secure a monopoly of the
oil refining business. This method of
combination OF independent corporations
lowed in other combinations. The combi-
nations thus formed are called trusts. In
fact, however, the method by which a
number of Independent corporations is
matter wholly immaterial to the public.
1t is not the form of the combination. but
the object and result of the com ination,
which concerns the public. 1t Is not,
properly speaking, he trust. but the mo
nopoly, to which the public object. Both
the object and the effect Of the Standard
Oil trust were to secure monopoly OF
the oil refining business. The same thing
may be said of the sugar trust, the to-
bacco trust. the steel trust and others
less famous because not organized and
conducted on SO large scale.
The coal combine Is not TECHNICALLY
trust-that Is, the combination has not
been effected by giving to trustees a ma
jority of the stock Of the companies
which are combined in mining and car
rying coal; but 1t is monopoly; 1t Is
combination Of what were before COM
peting corporations, and 1t was effected
ia of securing a mOnODOlv IN
anthracite coal So the United Nina
Workers is not technically trust, but 1t
Is, or is endeavoring to be, monopoly.
That is, 1t Is an Organization Of local
independent Of one another, and 1t was
effected for the purpose Of controlling all
the skilled labor that Is engaged in min
ing anthracite coal
nation of capitalists and to a combination
of laborers, though the term trust Is or
dlnarily used only to designate COM
bination of capitalists. not of laborers,
ticular kind of capitalistic combination.
But in popular discussion the term trust
embodes the wider meaning. 1t Is In
this wider meaning that"The Outlook uses
the word. In answer to the question,
what Is a trust? we reply:
Technically, trust is particular
form of capitalistic combination; in pop
ular parlance, trust Is any combination
of capitalists or laborers organized for
the purpose or with the effect of secur-
ing a monopoly in any commodity or
conve aierce by excluding competition.
regulating If moi limiting output and de-
termining If not enhancing prices
The sapitalistic trust has created its
monopoly in various ways. Sometimes
Il has sold IS goods below cost until its
competing rival has been compelled to
abandon It's business. Sometimes 1t has
refused to sell its goods to merchants
IInsI h. de nf al tnN
or it has given especial rebates to mer-
chants who handled only its own goods.
or 1t has secured, generally by underhand
means, special rebates from the railroads,
or it has secured the absolute control OF
the aticle necessary to the welfare of
the public, as the coal combine has Sc
cured the control of all the anthracite
coal in the United states, and thus has
been able to exclude all competition from
the field.
The laborers' trust has also endeavored
to create it's monopoly by various meth
DDS; sometimes by securing law limit
ing or excluding free competition. like
the Federal law forbidding the free i'm
portation of contract labor, or the Penn
sylvania law forbidding the employment
of skilled labor in the mines except by
licensed miners who have had two wears
by creating a public opinion among Ia
borers themselves which operates to ex-
clude the individual laborer from any
trade in which labor is already organized;
sometimes by boycotting any concerns
which manufacture goods except by or
ganzed labor, sympathetic strikes against
any concerns which handle goods made
by other than organized labor; and,
finally, by intimidation and open violence
against individual labor when 1t has
vantured to enter into competition with
the labor which is organized That there
are great ethical differences between
-, @Nktk4 ton l.
palpa BILE, but the object sought by all
these methods Is precisely the same
namely, the exclusion of all competition:
and thus the establishment of practical
monopoly.
This answer prepares the way for the
answer to the question. What is the evil
of the trust? The trust is evil because 1t
is a nor opoy 1t is intoleraSle that any
man. or any body of men, in free coun-
try should be permitted to control such
necessaries to modern civilized life as
oil. coal. beef, sugar. -four steel, trans
portation, intercommunication, and the
like. whether their control Is justly or
unjusty, wisely or unwisey, exercised.
There are many incidental evils in I'M
regulated monopolies. They have cor
rupted government; oppressed, sometimes
financially ruined. sometimes literally de-
stroyed, individual competitors; they have
been curt and overbearing in their treat
ment of rivals, of partners, of the public;
the capitalistic monopoly has demanded
the disruptinon and destruction of the la
Dor monopoly that 1t may be able to con-
troll wages as well prices; the labor
monopoly has demanded the disruption
and destruction of capitalistc monopolies.
under the delusion that 1t can thus get
all the profits of monopoly itself, In
other words, secure a monopoly of mo-
nopoly; in some cases, as at the present
time, two monopolies have engaged In a
life-and-death struggle and left the public
to suffer. while they have either expressly
or tacitly denied the right of the public
combined to make the monopoly more
secure, and have divided the profits be-
tween themselves. But these are. only
the incidental evils of monopolies. A mo-
nopoly controlled by men regardless alike
of public welfare and public opinion may
inflict a greater immediate injury on the
people than a monopoly controlled by
men who are either wise enough or just
enough to see that they can not perma-
nently advance their own interests by
policy which sacrifices the interests of
the public But the real evil of monopoly
is inherent and exists whether the mo-
nopoly does well or does ill., 1t is the
evil which inheres in all absolutism.
Industrial absolutism is not better than
ecclesiastical or political absolutism. 1t
is no better and no worse when exercised
by a labor organization than when exer-
cised by a capitalistic organization. 1t
is no more defensible when 1t employs the
Machinery of law than when 1t puts law
at open defiance: no better when II de-
fes law by means of corrupting Legis-