Date
4-7-2026
Department
College of Arts and Sciences
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy in History (PhD)
Chair
Christopher Sneeringer
Keywords
Antitrust, Monopoly, Monopolies, Regulatory Policy, Federalism, Capitalism, Antitrust ideology, Corporate Trust, Corporate Consolidation, Trustbusting, Economic Concentration, interstate commerce, Interstate Commerce Commission, federal authority, national authority, constitutional federalism, regulation, commerce clause, railroads, railroad industry, Gilded Age capitalism, transportation networks, Northern Securities Case, Northern Securities Company, United States v. Northern Securities Co., Northern Securities Co. v. United States, Northern Securities Co, v. Minnesota, James J. Hill, Samuel Van Sant, George Stephen, Donald Smith, Hudson's Bay Company, Rupert's Land, railroad merger, holding company, transcontinental railroads, American Northwest, Pacific Railway Act, dual federalism, federal vs state power, state regulation, federal regulation, Progressive Era reform, populist movement, moral reform, public opinion, economic inequality, Theodore Roosevelt, robber barons, corporate personhood, economic theory, legal interpretation, United States, History, Mississippi River, Minnesota, Canada
Disciplines
History
Recommended Citation
McNeff, Denise A., "An Apology for American Monopolies and the Rise of Antitrust Early Republic-1904" (2026). Doctoral Dissertations and Projects. 8038.
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/8038
Abstract
Eras function as the historical markers that continually redefine human existence, and the innovations of nineteenth-century America stand apart as a period of unprecedented entrepreneurial, political, and social change. As railroad magnate and entrepreneur James J. Hill astutely observed in 1910, such markers are defined by achievement, advancement, and purpose. Yet, the entrepreneurial ideology of this era has frequently been obscured by moral crusades against capitalism rather than examined within the context of the evolving relationship between government authority and corporate power. From the nation’s founding in the late eighteenth century to early twentieth century, these developments fundamentally challenged foundations of the American governance, business, and social structure.
This study challenges traditional narratives surrounding the origins and evolution of American monopolies and antitrust ideology through integrated legal, political and economic analysis, positioning the Northern Securities Co. cases as the critical analytical centerpiece of that transformation. Rather than framing corporate consolidation solely as a threat to democratic institutions, this study contests the historical villainization of the period’s monopolist growth and argues that the emergence of antitrust ideology developed in concert with the consolidation of national stability, the expansion of constitutional federalism, and a redefinition of national power structures. Federal regulatory authority did not emerge merely as an expression of political zeal or moral reform, but a pivotal mechanism in the transformation of American federalism, capitalism, and interstate commerce in the United States. Through a comprehensive analysis drawn from congressional records, judicial opinions, corporate papers, state documents, and media accounts, this study traces how commerce and monopolies played an instrumental role in redefining the power, strength, and purpose of the United States from its fragile formative years until its emergence as a strong federal regulatory nation that asserted itself at the turn of the twentieth century.
