Page:EB1911 - Volume 27.djvu/356

 secured monopolistic power has not been successfully attacked in the courts. For several years it has been supposed that a similar agreement existed among the sugar refiners. They themselves, however, acknowledge only an agreement regarding the amount of the output which shall be assigned to each, and deny any agreement as to prices. Of course an agreement regarding output would be likely to have a material effect upon prices. Somewhat similar combinations exist among the petroleum refiners, the porcelain makers, and some few others. The government has taken no active steps in the matter, but popular opinion seems to be awakening somewhat.

Austria.—In Austria the development of combinations has been very marked. The most successful combination, on the whole, as well as one of the earliest, has been that of the iron industry. The sugar industry, however, including both refiners and producers of the raw sugar, and the petroleum industry, are also combinations of great power. The form of these combinations is ordinarily that of an agreement regarding both output and prices. In some instances a central selling bureau fixes the prices, in others the market is divided, while in others still other forms of agreements of many kinds which serve to secure a monopoly are found. The movement has spread very rapidly indeed, until, in the opinion of many writers in Austria, practically all branches of industry, in which agreements for the lessening of competition will prove advantageous, are now largely controlled by combinations. The courts of Austria have, on the whole, shown themselves hostile to the movement. Contracts for the division of the market, for the assignment of fixed proportions of the entire output to different establishments, the fixing of prices, &c, are declared void and will not be enforced by the courts. This adverse action, however, does not seem to have affected very materially the tendency towards combination, although it has perhaps tended somewhat to encourage the formation of large corporations which should purchase all of the separate plant in any one industry. This tendency, again, is checked by the fact that the corporation law requires publicity in business, and that the taxes are heavier on corporations than on private firms, both as regards the legal rate and the certainty of Collection. A government commission has recommended recognition of the combinations by law and their careful supervision and regulation by government authority.

TRUXTUN, THOMAS (1755–1822), American naval officer, was born at Jamaica, Long Island, on the 17th of February 1755. He went young to sea, and during the War of Independence was first persuaded to serve in a royal ship. But having been wounded in an action with a privateer manned by his countrymen, it is said that he declared he would never fight them again. Henceforth he commanded a succession of privateers sent out to cruise against British trade and transports—the “St. James,” the “Mars,” the “Independence.” He had the reputation of being uniformly successful in all engagements with British vessels. When the independence of the United States was recognized he returned to trade with a high reputation as a seaman. He was the author of a treatise on longitude and latitude, of a “System of masting a 44-gun frigate,” and was an advocate for the foundation of a national navy. When the United States navy was reconstituted in 1798 he was one of the original corps of six captains. During the last years of the 18th and first of the 19th century American commerce was subject to much intolerable interference on the part of the French as well as of the British naval officers. It was against the first that Truxtun rendered the services which have made him a prominent personage in the history of the United States navy. In February 1799 he was captain of the United States “Constellation” (36) and on the 19th of that month he captured the French “L’Insurgente” (36). In the following year, and while still in command of the “Constellation,” he fought the French “Vengeance” (40), and drove her into Curaçao. The crippled state of his own ship, which had lost her mainmast, prevented him from taking possession of the enemy. In 1802 he was to have sailed in command of the squadron sent against the Barbary pirates, but a difference having occurred between him and the navy department in regard to the appointment of a captain to his flagship, his remonstrance against the official decision of the authorities was treated as a resignation, which it was apparently not meant to be, and he was not employed any further. He died at Philadelphia on the 5th of May 1822.

TRYON, DWIGHT WILLIAM (1849–), American artist, was born t Hartford, Connecticut, on the 13th of August 1849. At the age of twenty-five he left his position as a clerk in a Hartford publishing house to devote himself entirely to art, and two years afterwards went to Paris, where he became a pupil of the Ecole des Beaux Arts, under J. de la Chevreuse, Charles Daubigny and A. Guillemet. A skilful landscape painter, New England provided his best subjects. He first exhibited at the Salon in 1881, and in the same year returned to the United States, settling first in New York City; in 1882–1886 he was director of the Hartford School of Art, and in 1886 became professor of art at Smith College. He became a member of the Society of American Artists (1882), a National Academician (1891), and a member of the American Water Color Society. He won numerous medals and prizes at important exhibitions, among his pictures being “Daybreak,” “Moonlight” and “Early Spring, New England.”

TRYON, SIR GEORGE (1832–1893), British admiral, a younger son of Thomas Tryon, of Bulwick Park, Northamptonshire, was born on the 4th of January 1832. He entered the navy in 1848, on board Lord Dundonald’s flagship on the North American station; was subsequently in the “Vengeance” with Lord Edward Russell in the Black Sea; was landed for service with the naval brigade; and was made a lieutenant in November, but dated back to the 21st of October 1854. From 1855 to 1858 he was in the “Royal Albert” flagship of Sir Edmund Lyons; and from 1858 to 1860 in the royal yacht, which gave him his promotion to commander on the 25th of October 1860. From 1861 to 1864 he was commander of the “Warrior,” the first British sea-going ironclad; from 1864 to 1866 he commanded the “Surprise” gun-vessel in the Mediterranean; and was promoted to be captain on the 11th of April 1866. In 1867 he was sent out as director of transports and store ships for the Abyssinian expedition, a post which involved a great deal of hard work in a sweltering and unhealthy climate. He discharged his duties exceedingly well, but his health broke down, and returned to England a helpless invalid. From 1871 to 1873 he was private secretary to Mr Goschen, then first lord of the admiralty; and from 1874 to 1877 commanded the “Raleigh” in India with the Prince of Wales, and later in the Mediterranean. In the years 1878–1881 he had command of the “Monarch,” one of the Mediterranean fleet under Sir Geoffrey Hornby and Sir Beauchamp Seymour, afterwards Lord Alcester. He was subsequently for two years secretary of the admiralty; and for three years more, on his promotion in April 1884 to the rank of read-admiral, commander-in-chief on the Australian station. On his return in June 1887