Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!

Sign up free
Page thumbnail for The Labor World
Story August 14, 1909

The Labor World

Duluth, Saint Louis County, Minnesota

What is this article about?

Samuel Untermeyer, a New York lawyer, warns of danger unless the sugar trust is criminally prosecuted and destroyed. The author critiques this view, arguing trusts won't be jailed or destroyed, and suggests government ownership like the post office to avoid trouble. --Dallas Laborer.

Clipping

OCR Quality

95% Excellent

Full Text

Mistakes of Untermeyer.

Samuel Untermeyer, a New York corporation lawyer, who happens lately in some suits against the sugar trust, declares that the future is fraught with danger unless they are brought within the clutches of the criminal law and destroyed. Now, if this means anything, it means that some dread thing like a violent revolution or a civil war is going to take place unless those individuals most nearly responsible for the trusts are to be jailed, etc. Imagine Carnegie, Baer, Belmont, Armour and Rockefeller in jail! They certainly are less likely to go to jail than the trusts are to be destroyed. No, Mr. Untermeyer makes several mistakes. First, in even imagining a trust official in jail. Second, in imagining the trusts can be destroyed. Third, in not seeing that we can avoid trouble over the sugar trust, as we avoid it over the postal trust. We need to own the sugar industry and to operate it just as we own and operate the postoffice.--Dallas Laborer.

What sub-type of article is it?

Editorial Political Commentary

What themes does it cover?

Justice Crime Punishment

What keywords are associated?

Sugar Trust Untermeyer Trusts Government Ownership Criminal Law

What entities or persons were involved?

Samuel Untermeyer Carnegie Baer Belmont Armour Rockefeller

Where did it happen?

New York

Story Details

Key Persons

Samuel Untermeyer Carnegie Baer Belmont Armour Rockefeller

Location

New York

Story Details

Critique of Untermeyer's call for criminal prosecution and destruction of the sugar trust, suggesting instead government ownership to prevent revolution or civil war.

Are you sure?