Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy. Edited by HENRY HIGGS, C.B. Vols. I and II. London: Macmillan & Co., 1923. Vol. I, pp. 887; Vol. II, pp. 962.

An examination of the first two volumes of the revised and enlarged edition of Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy indicates what has been accomplished in the new edition. The original stereotyped plates have been used with limited modification in order to keep the cost of a new edition from being prohibitive. The additions have been gathered together in the appendix with an asterisk marking each topic which is treated in both sections. In the first volume, eightyeight pages constitute the appendix, and in the second volume, eighty

one.

The significant changes in the reprinted section consist of additions which bring down to date figures on various subjects and of substitutions of recent material for that in the first edition where the copy does not have historical significance. The additions and substitutions are so adjusted that the original spacing is not interfered with. Most of the changes correct figures up to about 1910. Some of the topics, however, have been revised more recently. Although most of the revisions involve sentences or paragraphs, some whole pages are entirely rewritten. This is notably the case in the consideration of docks.

About one-third of the items in the appendix are additions to subjects treated in the main section of the volume. In some cases the discussions are merely carried down to date. In other cases historical evidence not formerly included is presented. "The American School of Economic Thought," for instance, is given much fuller historical consideration in the appendix than in the main section. The new items include: biographies, definitions, recent contributions to economic literature, business and financial practices of recent or war origin, historical developments in organization or policy of countries, and developments and procedure of economic significance growing out of legislation. Bounties on sugar, Bureau of Labor in the United States, commercial intelligence, copartnership, Drago doctrine, and engineering agreements are subjects indicative of the type of new material. Two sections of interest deal quite fully with economic libraries and with teaching of economics in Great Britain and the United States.

England, the United States, and English-speaking colonies are given the main consideration in additions as in the original work, but not to the exclusion of other countries. The general, groupings repre

sentative of various lines of economic interest are necessarily maintained, since so much of the material reappears unchanged. The revisions and additions bring valuable material up to a recent date.

G. G. TAYLOR

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Topical Studies and References on the Economic History of American Agriculture. By LOUIS B. SCHMIDT. Revised ed. Philadelphia: McKinley Publishing Co., 1923. Pp. 126. $1.50.

Those who have had occasion to refer to the first edition of this work, the most useful available covering the field down to date, will welcome the appearance of this new edition. The portion devoted to the references has been increased in size by about a third and ten new topics have been added to the original thirty-eight, all but one in the period since 1860. While material published since the first edition was put out in 1919 has been included, the expansion in size has also made possible the addition of references to earlier publications.

that it was designed to meet a special emergency. The act remains upon the statute books of the state.80

THE ANTITRUST MOVEMENT IN NEW JERSEY AND ITS DECLINE (1901-29)

Opposition to the corporation policy of New Jersey, however, never quite died out within the state itself. The strong evidence, which daily became more convincing, that New Jersey was actually encouraging corporate practices which were being opposed by the other states and even by the national government aroused political reaction within the state. The report on trusts in 1900 of the United States Industrial Commission stimulated the reform movement. After commenting on the fact that much of the corporate corruption of 1899 and 1900 was due to New Jersey's laws, the Nation remarked "that these laws-an admitted disgrace and reproach to the State which passed them-would sooner or later be wiped off the statute books was a foregone conclusion."'81

As early as 1901, the Democratic platform within the state called for trust reform. In 1904, led by George L. Record, a Republican, and Everet Colby, a Democrat, the reform element again tried to break the hold of the corporations. By 1907 the movement, bipartisan in character, had succeeded in pledging the candidates for the governorship in both parties to the enforcement of laws against the corporations.82 "New Jersey, tired of her bosses, and sick of being called the most corrupt of all the States, was beginning to bestir herself."'83

With the election of Woodrow Wilson as governor in 1910, the movement for corporate reform attained full recognition. Wilson had declared in his campaign: "I take the three great questions before us to be, reorganization and economy in administration, the equalization of taxation, and the control of cor

80

Chanalis, General Corporation Act of New Jersey (1929), sec. 132. A second section of this act was declared unconstitutional in Western National Bank v. Reckless, 96 Fed. Reports, 70.

81 January 23, 1913, p. 91.

82

W. E. Dodd, Woodrow Wilson and His Work (New York, 1920), p. 88.

[blocks in formation]

porations." More pressing political matters engaged the legislature's attention until 1912, but in his annual message of that year, Governor Wilson took up the question of the corporations. He said:

The corporation laws of the State notoriously stand in need of alteration. They are manifestly inconsistent with the policy of the Federal Government and with the interests of the people in the all-important matter of monopoly, to which the attention of the nation is now so earnestly directed. The laws of New Jersey, as they stand, so far from checking monopoly actually encourage it. . . . These are matters which affect the honor and good faith of the State. We should act upon them at once and with clear purpose.

85

The direct result of this appeal was the passage, February 17, 1913, of a series of famous acts, known as the "Seven Sisters." The first of these acts undertook to define a trust and to declare what practices would thereafter be illegal. No corporation or combination of corporations was permitted to (1) acquire a monopoly, (2) limit production or increase prices, (3) prevent competition, (4) fix prices. The subsequent acts repealed laws authorizing holding companies. Corporations were forbidden to buy stocks of competing companies with a view to controlling them. Price discriminations, save those based on quantity and quality of goods, transportation or other valid charges, were forbidden. Corporations might issue stock for property or goods, but the property must be the full equivalent of the money value of the stock. All violations of these laws involved personal liability for the directors and officers of the guilty corporations and a penalty of a fine or imprisonment or both might be imposed.se

It is impossible to determine the exact effect which these laws had upon the corporations of New Jersey. Within two weeks of their enactment, Governor Wilson was inaugurated as president, and the state soon relapsed to its more liberal policy.

84

'Quoted by H. J. Ford, Woodrow Wilson: The Man and His Work (New York, 1916), pp. 127-28.

s New Jersey Legislative Documents (1912), I, 4.

80

Laws of New Jersey (1913), pp. 25-34 passim. See also Nathan B. Williams, Laws on Trusts, and Monopolies, Domestic and Foreign (Washington, 1914).

There is little to indicate that the state or the corporations suffered particularly from the provisions of the "Seven Sisters" acts. In 1912, the year before the acts were passed, 7,935 corporations paid the state $2,529,029. In 1913, 8,434 corporations paid $2,578,716.87 It is true that the number of charters issued from 1913 to 1915 declined,88 but there are good reasons to believe that this drop was materially affected by other than legal

causes.

89

An act of 1915 materially amended that portion of the "Seven Sisters" acts which related to the rights of corporations to deal in the stocks of other companies. The first of the acts of 1913 was repealed outright in 1917,9° and the other acts of the series, if they had not been amended previously, proved futile, for they were aimed at the trusts which the first act had defined. The wave of sentiment for corporate reform has receded since its height in 1913. Other economic and political topics engage the public mind. The corporation laws of New Jersey in 1929 resemble very much the laws of 1896. Such differences as do exist are those gradually evolved by time and changing economic views. The policy has remained almost constant.

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA

91

HAROLD W. STOKE

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »