Towards the end of the 19th century, three factors enabled the second industrial revolution. Improvements in communication and transportation allowed for greater shipments of products and raw materials, the development of electricity provided a cheaper source of energy, and most importantly, major corporations emerged as a result of new consumer and industrial goods. The development of science and technology, combined with increasingly capitalist markets had given rise to modern corporations that controlled overwhelmingly large portions of a certain industry within the nation. However, these larger businesses were a major source of corruption, as they often harmed smaller businesses and limited competition and economic growth. To take a …show more content…
stand against larger monopolies, the Sherman Antitrust Act was enacted to protect small businesses, and although the act initially failed its purpose, later reforms and legislations allowed the act to effectively counter harmful corporations. In industries including sugar, tobacco, and oil industries, larger companies would eliminate smaller businesses for their own gain. One notable example was when John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company bought out smaller companies in the same industry to eliminate competition, thus reducing opportunities for others. Such trusts and monopolies interfered with the ability of small businesses to compete and therefore reduced trade and harmed the economy. Thus, the Sherman Antitrust Act was passed to prevent monopolies and trusts from restraining businesses. Act 1 of the Sherman Antitrust states, “Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise… in restraint of trade or commerce… is hereby declared to be illegal” (Sherman americanhistory.abc-clio.com), therefore outlawing trusts, a combined form of companies. To stand against monopolies, Act 2 states, “Every person who shall monopolize… any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor” (Sherman americanhistory.abc-clio.com). The intent of the antitrust laws was to protect smaller businesses as well as benefit the national economy, and therefore was seen as a step to taking a stand against larger, more powerful corporations. Through a series of court cases, the Sherman Antitrust was used by employers to take down labor unions which they claimed to be “combinations” that “restrained trade or commerce”. In the 1893 case of United States v. Workingmen's Amalgamated Council, Congress was able to effectively rule that combinations of labor, such as labor unions, were included in the antitrust if they were a “combination in restraint of commerce” (O’Neal, 219). This ruling allowed employers to take down labor unions through the injunction that was issued. Another case in which the Sherman Antitrust was used against labor unions was the notable case Danbury Hatters, officially known as Loewe v. Lawlor, in 1908. A nationwide boycott orchestrated by protesting workers cost the Loewe Company $85,000, and in response, the company sued the union. The Supreme Court ruled that the union’s “use of a secondary boycott” was “a restraint of trade within the meaning of the Sherman Act” (O’Neal, 219), thus eliminating power from labor unions. The detrimental effects of the Sherman Antitrust on labor unions therefore reflected the inability of the document to act alone. During the first few years in which the Sherman Antitrust was enacted, the act had virtually no power to fulfill its original purpose. Such inadequacy was displayed in the 1895 case of United States v. E. C. Knight Company which came to court when President Grover Cleveland's administration charged the American Sugar Refining Company for illegal restraints of trade. In the early 1890s, the company had bought out competing companies through purchasing stocks, resulting in a trust that controlled 98% of the nation’s sugar refining industries. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the American Sugar Refining Company, effectively shutting down any belief that the Sherman Antitrust could regulate trusts. The Sherman Antitrust had essentially been proved to be worthless. Failure to mention labor unions and failure to define what counted as a “trust” or a “monopoly” was what accounted for most issues of the Sherman Antitrust.
Without precise definitions, US Courts were unable to effectively “give precise legal meaning to the law” (Sherman go.galegroup.com). This meant that the court could rule in favor of large corporations that infringed on antitrust laws, such as in United States v. E. C. Knight Company. Additionally, failure to mention labor unions had a particularly devastating effect. Employers continuously used the Sherman Antitrust to take down the efforts of labor unions and to suppress workers who attempted to take a stand against corporations. Most court cases ruled in favor of the employers, further halting union activities. By the beginning of the 20th century, the Sherman Antitrust had failed in every aspect of its original …show more content…
purpose. Despite the many early failures, the Sherman Antitrust was able to develop into a more effective act with the help of President Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt’s “trust-busting” campaign included establishing a Department of Commerce and Labor to “oversee the actions of business and labor unions” and a Bureau of Corporations to “uncover violations of the Sherman Act (Sherman go.galegroup.com). These organizations allowed for better use of the Sherman Antitrust, and in industries such as those of oil, steel, and meatpacking, Roosevelt was able to take down monopolies and trusts. Later on, President William H. Taft also contributed to the effort and successfully employed the Sherman Antitrust against the Standard Oil Trust in 1911. Had it not been for Roosevelt’s persistence and reforms, the antitrust laws would have remained a failure. One notable case exhibiting successful use of the Sherman Antitrust was the 1904 case of Northern Securities Company v. United States which had taken place during the time Roosevelt’s presidency. The NSC was controlled by businessmen J. P. Morgan, James J. Hill, and E. H. Harriman, who had worked together to monopolize rail lines in the north. The Supreme Court ruled against the trust and the NSC was subsequently broken up, stopping the combining of railroads. This result strengthened the power of the Sherman Antitrust and enabled the law to become a “major government power to restrict monopolies” (Northern Securities). Roosevelt’s success at implementing the antitrust law against large corporations also reflected a change in the system that would allow future small businesses to stand against monopolies. This significant victory was vital to ensuring the belief that small businesses could in fact successfully stand against big businesses. In addition to Roosevelt’s campaign, the government further strengthened the power of the Sherman Antitrust through a series of enactments. The Clayton Antitrust Act, issued in 1914, “regulated mergers of companies to avoid the creation of monopolies” (Sherman go.galegroup.com). Any companies that wished merge had to approved by the Federal Trade Commission, which was established in the same year. In 1919, the Department of Justice formed the Antitrust Division which worked with the FTC to enforce the Antitrust. The Federal Trade Commission had the power to suspend any activity that was suspected to infringe on the Sherman Antitrust, while the Antitrust Division investigated the situation. These enforcements not only strengthened the antitrust laws, but also made them more efficient and precise. The new departments and laws gave small businesses an even greater opportunity to take a stand against monopolies and trusts. Thus, by the mid 1900s, the Sherman Antitrust was being used as originally intended, due in part to the increase in government regulation. Overall, the Sherman Antitrust was able to break up monopolies, thus enabling competition and opportunities for smaller businesses. Although the act initially appeared as a setback for labor unions and was deemed to be ineffective, Presidents Roosevelt and Taft passed legislations that allowed for greater enforcement of the antitrust. The addition of government involvement in enforcing antitrust laws also greatly impacted the act’s ability to carry out its purpose. The struggle for small businesses to be able to openly compete in certain industrial markets resulted in a complex government system with many different branches working to enforce antitrust laws. It was only with the help of government interference that smaller businesses could effectively take a stand against larger corporations. Even so, the Sherman Antitrust did eventually succeed against monopolies and trusts and interfered with and limited trade. The Sherman Antitrust still remains in use today, and is considered as an important part of the business and economic world. Much like how during the industrial age, business tycoons appeared in markets involved with steel, oil, and sugars, modern capitalist corporations also emerged from rapid technological developments.
In an attempt to decrease competition in the computer technology industry, Microsoft had violated the Sherman Antitrust. In the 1998 case of U.S. vs. Microsoft, the Microsoft company was charged for anticompetitive and monopolistic practices that violated antitrust laws. The plaintiff had claimed that Microsoft had engaged “in a series of exclusionary, anticompetitive, and predatory acts to maintain its monopoly power” (Excerpts) which went against Section 2 of the antitrust law. Microsoft had also allegedly violated Section 1 by “tying its browser to its operating system and entering into exclusive dealing arrangements” which was ruled as a “combination… in restraint of trade or commerce” (Excerpts). The Court ruled against Microsoft, exemplifying the ability of the Sherman Antitrust to curb unethical and illegal monopolistic operations even in modern
day. Another modern-day use of the Sherman Antitrust was the case of Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. when the Eastman Kodak Company attempted to impose a monopoly on companies that sold replacement parts. The Eastman Kodak Company violated the Sherman Antitrust through attempts to illegally tie “ the sale of service for Kodak machines to the sale of parts” and “unlawfully trying to monopolize the market for service” (Greenhouse). The Court Ruled that the Eastman Kodak Company was liable and further restricted the company’s activities to ensure that a monopoly would not form. This shows how the government, by use of the Sherman Antitrust, was able to continue protecting smaller businesses from larger and more powerful corporations after increasing regulations to enforce the act. By taking a stand against big businesses in 1890, the Sherman Antitrust was able to take down unlawful monopolies and trusts in the 21st century. The Sherman Antitrust Act ultimately resulted in a successful way to regulate large corporations that threatened competition and stifled economic growth. After the initial failure of the Antitrust, President Theodore Roosevelt’s additional regulations enabled significant improvements that increased the effectiveness of the law. In taking a stand against big businesses, smaller companies had faced setbacks during the first decade after the Sherman Antitrust was enacted. However, persistence and increased enforcement of the act eventually resulted in positive long-term effects that extended into the 21st century. Not only did the Sherman Antitrust benefit the companies that it protected, but also the national markets and economy as well.
United States has several laws that ensure that competition among businesses flow rely and new competitors get free access to the market. These laws intend to ensure fair and balanced competitive business practices. However, there are times when some businesses will do anything to gain competitive edge. USA has strong antitrust laws that prohibit fixing market price, price discrimination, conspiring boycott, monopolizing, and adopting unfair business practices. The history of Antitrust laws goes back to 1890 when Congress passed Sherman Act. In 1914, Congress passed two more acts: Federal Trade Commission Act, and Clayton Act. With some revisions, these three acts are still core antitrust acts.
Something also known as the "American Plan" consisted of the corporate leaders wanting open shop, which received the support of the National Association of Manufacturers. It busted unions in the 20's because unions were viewed as un-American and subversive. Union power was also hurt by actions of the Justice Department and the Supreme Court. As a result, union membership seriously declined. One...
America’s large abundance of natural and human resources is what enabled the nation to develop so greatly in such a short amount of time. During the nations metamorphosis into the worlds industrial leader, the gross national product became eight times greater than after the civil war. New inventions also played a vital role in the country's industrial revolution. The technologies helped improve productivity, transportation, and communication. With the transcontinental railroad, refrigerated railroad cars, and the new air-brake system, larger amounts of various products could be shipped internationally at a much faster rate. A telegraph line was laid across the Atlantic Ocean, allowing the states to speak instantly with people in Europe. Railroads emerged rapidly and so did the scandals. Cruel, manipulative people dominated the country with their big businesses. Corporations came about, along with stock to raise money for them. The more money the corporation could raise through stock the closer they were to achieve economies of scale. Big businesses would sometimes come close to becoming monopolies that controlled the whole market. They were a rare...
Before the act, although monopolies were legal, it opened the door for federal investigations into good monopolies and bad monopolies. The act prevented the industries from obtaining too much power, however, the Sherman Antitrust Act was not completely efficient. The vague language used in the Sherman Antitrust Act proved it easy for companies to find legal loopholes, allowing them to engage in otherwise restricted business. The Clayton Antitrust Act was introduced in 1914 to clarify the principles the Sherman Antitrust Act set out to do. While the Sherman Antitrust Act said that monopolies were illegal, the Clayton Antitrust Act “defined as illegal certain business practices that are conducive to the formation of monopolies or that result from them. For example, specific forms of holding companies and interlocking directorates were forbidden.” (Britanica) This legislation was influential and was used to dissolve many monopolies in years to
After the Civil War had ended a new age of industry was brought on to America. Because of natural resources like coal and iron ore, steel was a big product of american factories that helped to grow and expand the economy. Transportation and Technology also contributed to the growth of corporations in America. Ruthless and driven entrepreneurs bought more and more companies creating monopolies over industry like steel, oil, and the railroads. The Entrepreneurs became extraordinarily powerful in not only American economy, but also politics. From the end of the Civil War till the beginning of the twentieth century, large businesses on America and its people.
United States versus Microsoft Corporation case was a set of combined civil engagements filed against Microsoft relating to the Sherman Antitrust Act by the Department of Justice. In the case, the Department of Justice purported that Microsoft abused monopoly supremacy on PCs in its control of OS sales and web browser software sales (Lohr& Brinkley, 2001). The conflict evolved around the integration of the internet explorer browser software in Microsoft’s Windows OS; a move that was argued to restrict web browser competitors like Opera and Netscape from accessing the browser market. Microsoft argued that it did not have a case to answer and stated the misfortune was the result of the fierce competition and innovation strategies in its industry (Glader, 2006). The following paper aims at analyzing the merits generated from the final settlement of the case and outlines the parties that benefited and those whose interests were harmed.
In the 19th century, prior to the civil war, the United States underwent a transition from an agricultural based economy to an industrial based economy, in what is more commonly known as the American Industrial Revolution. This revolution had many contributing factors. Technology improvements allowed for greater production volume and speed. Transportation and Communications (internal improvements) advancements allowed for greater reach of markets and spurred domestic migration. Population increases, because of foreign migration and natural causes, resulted in more labor and more consumers. The government contributed financially to transportation and enacted protection laws. Capital given by the government and private sector to projects helped to fund corporations and internal improvements. The pre-Civil-War industrial revolution was a time of many
Advancements in new technology clearly promoted the industrial growth of the United States. The new technologies allowed business owners to reduce labor in the movement of materials from one point to the other. This occurred by using the new technology of railroads and machinery. Business owners used the railroads to transport their finished product and raw materials around the country more efficiently, which enabled businesses to expand. The business owners were now able to use machines for lifting materials from one floor to another and to use conveyer belts to move materials around on an assembly line. The use of machines is evident because the graph in document 5 clearly shows that American industrial and agricultural power sources between 1850 and 1900 changed. This is evident because in 1850, only 13% human power and 35% water and coal power was used, but in 1900 a mere 5% human power and a whopping 73% water and coal power was used. The use of machines more than doubled over the course from 1850-1900, and the human output de...
Transportation advances began a unification process across the country, both economically and culturally (Roark, 262). The United States finally started to take advantage of the natural resources of the land to benefit the economy. By having water powered equipment, the growth of factories mushroomed, but at the same time, caused a great issue with working conditions and the employment of women. Financing new ventures became an important facet during the market revolution. America’s money supply grew considerably, which led to increased investment opportunities.
The Second Industrial Revolution took place between 1870 and 1914, beginning as Ulysses S. Grant entered the presidential office and coming to a close in Woodrow Wilson’s first term. While the (first) Industrial Revolution in America is often considered as one of the most fruitful and dense in innovations in history, the following decades brought innumerable technological advancements, improving the many recently created materials and machines. Scientists made great progress in developing steel, the use of internal combustion engines skyrocketed, networks to transmit electricity were produced for the first time, and the introduction of interchangeable parts revolutionized the system of mass production. During these years, advancements were
The Industrial Revolution was the major advancement of technology in the late 18th and early 19th century that began in Britain and spread to America. The national and federal government helped the United States grow into a self reliant nation with improvements in transportation, technology, manufacturing and the growth of the population. Americans had an economy based on manual labour, which was replaced by one dominated by industry and the manufacture of machinery. It began with the expansion of the textile industries and the development of iron-making techniques, and trade expansion was enabled by the introduction of canals, improved roads and railways. One of the first to kick off, was the textile industry.
With WWII on the horizon in the early 1940’s, Americans knew they must produce goods for the cause. Production was greatly needed and worker’s shoes needed to be filled. Labor Unions stepped up and proved to be extremely productive and fruitful. Although productivity was high, Union strikes began to brake out. Labor Union employees felt suppressed under the growing power of the unions and work stoppages were at an all time high in 1944. Acts such as the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 and Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959 were passed to protect Union workers, however the corrupt unions had left employees feeling used and disrespected. The abusive reputation of unions still stands today as the public and employees find it hard to trust such massive corporations with dishonest pasts.
Chandler Smith Coach McDaniel US History 5 May 2014 Technology and Industrial Growth: Second Industrial Revolution With the conclusion of the Civil War, the United States turned their focus on rebuilding railroad and telegraph networks in the South, completing those of the North, and expanding those of the West. Once the depression of the 1870s had completely diminished, the stage was set for the Second Industrial Revolution. Also known as the Technological Revolution, this was a phase of the larger Industrial Revolution that lasted from around the middle of the 1800s into the early 20th century. Most tend to believe it began around the time of the introduction of Bessemer steel in the 1860s and concluded around the arrival of the production line, mass production, and factory electrification. The Second Industrial Revolution was characterized by a few different things, including: the large scale iron and steel production, construction of railroads, increase in use of manufacturing machinery, improved use of steam power, and by electrical communications.
The Industrial Revolution was a period from the 18th to the 19th century where major changes in agriculture, manufacturing, transport, and technology had a profound effect in North America. The industrial revolution marked a major turning point in history because it changed every aspect of life in America and the country as a whole. People started replacing ploughs and other tools for machines that could do twice the work. While others moved to large cities and started working in factories and other businesses. Huge industries such as the textile, steel, and coal industry came out and had a profound effect on the industrial revolution but, they would not have been extremely successful if it was not for railroads. The railroads played a vital role in the development and success of other industries. The railroads triggered the biggest leap in transportation in history. Through technological and entrepreneurial innovations and the creation of steam-powered locomotives, the development of trains as public carriers of passengers and freight, brought forth the railroad. The railroad industry changed the nature of production because it became an important energy source that replaced human and animal power. Due to the important role of the railroads, workers became more productive, items were being shipped more quickly, and resources were becoming available to everyone including the working and middle class and not only the wealthy. The railroads became to be known as one of the biggest leaps of transportation in history. This is because it set up the next fifty years of America’s prosperity. The railroads became extremely popular and useful during the 1800’s to millions of people and other large companies. Although there were many indu...
The industrial revolution began in Europe in the 18th century. The revolution prompted significant changes, such as technological improvements in global trade, which led to a sustained increase in development between the 18th and 19th century. These improvements included mastering the art of harnessing energy from abundant carbon-based natural resources such as coal. The revolution was economically motivated and gave rise to innovations in the manufacturing industry that permanently transformed human life. It altered perceptions of productivity and understandings of mass production which allowed specialization and provided industries with economies of scale. The iron industry in particular became a major source of economic growth for the United States during this period, providing much needed employment, which allowed an abundant population of white people as well as minorities to contribute and benefit from the flourishing economy. Steel production boomed in the U.S. in the mid 1900s. The U.S. became a global economic giant due to the size of its steel industry, taking advantage of earlier innovations such as the steam engine and the locomotive railroad. The U.S. was responsible for 65 percent of steel production worldwide by the end of the 2nd World War (Reutter 1). In Sparrows Point: Making Steel: the Rise and Ruin of American Industrial Might, Mark Reutter reports that “Four out of every five manufacturing items contained steel and 40 percent of all wage earners owed their livelihood directly or indirectly to the industry.” This steel industry was the central employer during this era.