Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 5.djvu/255

 THE CONTROL OF TRUSTS 24 1

the field by low prices. They will return again, or others will take their places, if prices rise high enough to leave them a margin of profit over their greater cost of production. In the second place, if no competitors were likely to enter the same field, the price would still be limited by other kinds of com- petition. The commodity may not be an absolute necessity to very many consumers ; then a rise in price will lead to a ruinous decrease in the demand. Men would not consume many oranges at fifty cents apiece. The commodity, while satisfying an inelastic demand, may yet be replaced by something else which can render approximately the same satisfaction. Kerosene oil at a dollar a gallon would have but a limited sale. The con- sumers would either revert to tallow candles for illumination, or would find it cheaper to turn to electricity or gas, even if pri- vate plants had to be introduced.

But after all of this is said — and the most pronounced apologist for the trust can say no more — there is still a margin for exploitation. It is true, as Puck says, that the only differ- ence between a mere business firm and the trust is in size. But this is a capital difference. The size of the trust is itself suffi- cient to create a limited monopoly which can exploit the public to a certain extent purely in the interest of the managers. The most objectionable monopolies, it is true, are those which are protected from the kind of competition above described, either by governmental arrangements, such as tariffs and patents, or by natural monopolies of transportation facilities. Mr. Have- meyer is of the opinion that the customs tariffs are alone respon- sible for the trust, and multitudes share this opinion. M. de Rousier, in one of the most thorough studies of trusts,' holds that all trusts are due to these artificial conditions. According to him, if we should assume such a control of the railways as to render discriminating rates impossible, and should remove tariff protection and patent rights when these tended to shut out competition unduly, the trusts would disappear. Now, these are undoubtedly potent causes of the most objectionable of our monopolies, and the remedy for the evil is easily found, and the

' Les Industries monopolisles aux £tals-Unis, pp. 320-27.