The advocate., 1894-10-31

own property.
In the Legislature Ts the Power.
do not undertake to specify all the
provisions which it would be necessary to
incorporate In charter to secure to labor
its just reward, All I attempt is to indl-
cate the power which the legislature has
In creating and controlling corporations.
Formerly corporations having special
privileges were created by special acts,
which the courts construed to be contracts
between the granting power and the cor.
porators, which, once granted, could not
be repealed or varied by the granting pow
or. This granting OF charters to favored
individuals, comforting upon them privi.
leges not possessed by the general public,
became obnoxious to public sentiment.
and as o consequence general laws have
been passed in this and many other states
under which any three persons may be.
come incorporated for any private purpose,
This has become a worse evil than the old
system OF granting special charters. Un'
der the general law enacted in this state
30 years ago am informed %, 300 corpora.
tions have been created.
Irresponsible persons are often induced,
for small consideration, to form corpora
tlons with proposed capital Of millions;
to subscribe for the whole stock except
share or two, and for fanoied, imaginary
or worthless consideration to issue to
themselves as fully paid up stock, which
10 subsequently transferred to the real
parties in interest, who expect thereby tG
escape personal liability If the concern Is
failure and to pocket the profits If sue
cess. Business Of all sorts Is now to
great extent carried ON in the name OF
corporations, in order that the proprietora
may escape personal responsibility. How
can the individual, who Is personally re-
sponsible for his contracts, successfully
compete with corporation run by persons
who incur no such responsibility Doing
business in corporate name not only
paralyzes individual effort, but leads to
concentration of capital, the great evil OF
our time. The remedy for this growing
state of things would be to restrict the for
nation Of corporations to such as art
formed for public purposes or such as the
public have an interest in. Seventy eight
per cent Of the great fortunes Of the Unit
ed States are said to be derived from per-
manent monopoly privileges which ought
never to have been granted.
Should Limit the Power of Devise.
AS before stated, the power to dispose OF
property after death by will is conferred
by statute under certain limitations Why
should this privilege be given to dispose
Of more than fixed amount of property
to any one individual-say, property to the
value Of not over $500, 600 to the wife, OF
not more than 500, 900 to each child and
Of not more than $50, 900 to any otheg rel
ative, extending to the third or fourth de-
grees, and that the balance Of the estate
should escheat to the state, to be used by
it for the support of schools, charitable in
stitutions, the employment Of laborers In
making roads and other good purposesf
The law now provides for the escheat OF
estates Of persons dying without heirs.
The same limitation might be put upon
inheritances where there Is no will, and In
this way the accumulation Of vast estates
by inheritance or devise would be checked,
and property, especially landed estates,
which, by nature, belong to all, would DO
more equally distributed. Itshould not be
forgotten that the method Of transmitting
property from the dead to the living Is en-
tirely derived from the state. If public
policy requires that the state should give
to the dying possessor no longer able to
control or take with him his possessions
the privilege of disposing of SO much as
may be conducive to the comfort and hap
piness of his surviving kindred, does 1t re-
onire that this privilege should be extend
ed to his disposition Of millions to the In
jury Of the rest of mankindS
It is said that to limit the privilege Of
disposing of exceeding 81, 900, 900 of prop
erty by devise or descent would check en-
terprise and industry, as no man would
strnOola to acouire property which he