FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369   370  
371   372   373   374   375   376   377   378   379   380   381   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   >>   >|  
capitalistic monopoly in getting control of a market; great wealth may enable a company to get control of rare natural resources. In the discussion of industrial monopoly, the problem now before us, there is a good deal of vagueness and misunderstanding because of lack of definiteness in the use of words which have rapidly shifted in meaning. The word "trust" originally applied, and still in legal usage applies, to a particular form of organization, that of a board of trustees holding the stock, and thus unifying the control, of two or more formerly separate enterprises. The Standard Oil Company at one time had this form of organization, which was declared by the courts to be illegal _(ultra vires)_ for corporations. Now "trust" often is used in the sense of a corporation having monopoly power in some degree; either broadly, of any monopolistic corporation (including railways and local public utilities), or, oftener, limited to manufacturing and commercial monopolies, otherwise called "industrial trusts" in contrast with franchise trusts and railroads.[2] The word "combination" referred originally to a more or less thoro "merger," with a view to attaining monopolistic power, of a number of formerly separate organizations, as in the case of the United States Steel Corporation. But the word is often used as if it were a synonym for trust (in a narrower or wider sense) even as applied to a single enterprise that has grown to be monopolistic. A "trust" in the legal sense of a form of organization, and "combinations" as above defined, might have no monopoly power whatever; whereas a monopoly may be possessed by an individual owner (e.g., of a patent right, railroad, waterworks plant), or by a single corporation that has simply grown monopolistic without the trust form of organization or without combination. Now it is evident that the real problem is that of monopoly, however attained. Monopoly may be defined as such a degree of control over the supply of goods in a given market that a net gain will result if a portion is withheld.[3] In accord with growing and now dominant usage it is well to observe the following meanings in our discussion. "_Combination"_ is a term referring particularly to one method by which monopolies are formed. "_Trust,"_ in the now popular sense, is best limited to an industrial, primarily manufacturing, enterprise or group of enterprises, with some degree of monopoly power due not to a "specia
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369   370  
371   372   373   374   375   376   377   378   379   380   381   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
monopoly
 

monopolistic

 
control
 

organization

 

degree

 

industrial

 
corporation
 

applied

 
originally
 
enterprises

separate

 

single

 

defined

 

trusts

 

combination

 
problem
 

market

 

discussion

 

enterprise

 

limited


monopolies

 

manufacturing

 
synonym
 

Corporation

 
narrower
 

combinations

 
individual
 

possessed

 

patent

 
Combination

referring
 

meanings

 

dominant

 

observe

 

method

 

specia

 

primarily

 

formed

 

popular

 

growing


accord

 

attained

 

Monopoly

 
States
 
evident
 

railroad

 

waterworks

 

simply

 

supply

 
result