far-reaching new problems, having on the one hand to do with international combines and on the other hand with large individual concerns of a super-national and monopolistic character. In the past public attention in this country has not concerned itself appreciably with world "trusts" and world monopolies. They played a more important role in the trade policies of European countries. Prior to the war German industrial organization held the leadership in the sphere of international cartels. What its component units lacked in size and capital was made up by means of co-operative organization, which linked together German, Austrian, Belgian, French, Italian, British and other competitors in a given industry, and united them for the purposes of price agreements, division of territory, exchange of patents, etc. These international commercial phalanxes formed a sort of counter-balance over against large individual capitalistic concerns, chiefly American corporations. In some instances agreements and understandings were reached between the two rival parties. The political and economic collapse of the central European powers, and the weakened condition of French, Belgian and Italian industrial power, caused the breakdown of most of the former international cartels. This in turn has shifted the center of influence over into the camp of the large American and British corporations and companies. However, numerous factors make it probable, if not inevitable, that sooner or later the disrupted trade alliances among European business interests will again be reestablished, probably under French leadership. It seems equally reasonable to assume that in view of the greatly intensified intra-national combination movement, the international combines of the future will exercise a more dominating influence in the commercial arena of the world than their predecessors. World-trade Combinations Concern American Interests. A further point worth considering is the fact that heretofore international combines embraced chiefly European parties. During the past decade Japan, Australia and New Zealand, and several Latin-American countries have witnessed a rapid growth of the combination movement. It is quite probable that the business interests of these countries will in the future align themselves more or less closely with foreign groups and ententes. In fact, the beginning has already been made. While on the whole American firms have up to the present time not participated to any appreciable extent in such international private agreements, there is reason to believe that we are entering upon an era where greater co-operation with foreign combines will appeal to large and powerful circles of our community. Aside from all other considerations, the rapidly proceeding penetration of foreign industries and enterprises by American capital promises to develop into an element of decisive importance in shaping our future policy in this matter. Suggestion of International Trade Commission. But the question of international agreements or combinations is only one side of the foreign aspect of the "trust" question that confronts us in its new form. A somewhat different phase relates to the numerous individual concerns in various countries whose business activities encircle the globe, and which include manufacturing and merchandising houses as well as international financing and promoting concerns. The enormous agglomerations of wealth at the disposal of some of these concerns, their dominant control over a large part of some of the world's most important raw materials and of channels of distribution and communication have become more generally known during the world war. These enterprises offer a problem which concerns not any one country alone. It touches vital interests of many nations. This fact has been officially recognized by a number of committees in foreign countries which have studied the subject, and they all agree that the question of the control of international trade by private interests is eminently one for international action. Insofar as this subject has been given atten tion in our country up to this time the consensus of opinion appears to favor action through an international trade commission. Domestic Policy Advocates Regulated Competition. To sum up, the question of monopoly has engaged the attention of statesmen and philosophers as far back as the Ancient Orient. The old problem in new surroundings has now been an issue of vital political and economic significance in the United States for one generation. As we look back over this span of thirty years and observe a democratic people wrestling with this one of the problems so fundamental to human society, the gradual crystallization of a trade policy appears before our eyes. Starting out with a negative and repressive legal attitude toward big business, there followed a period of observation and of closer study of economic forces underlying our industrial structure. It led to stricter supervision and regulation through semi-judicial governmental agencies, especially established for this purpose, vested with preventive and corrective powers exercised to a large extent through publicity. Out of the world war new situations arose with a corresponding amplification of our "trust" policy. For the first time the influence of our foreign relations brings itself to bear on our national trade policy and culminates in legislation permitting combination, but in limited form and under government supervision. Such, in brief, are the milestones in the evolution of a question which is presented in its various aspects and in detailed form in the following chapters. |