The age-herald., 1899-09-16
Two Phases of Question

"In one sense I think 1t has a serious aspect. It matters very little how l capi- talizs an enterprise in itself. If 1 capitalize it at a hundred thousand dollars and it Is earning ten thousand dollars a year, the public would immediately put the shares at 100 per cent. premium, and that would be quoted at two hundred. It would make no difference whether I capitalized at one hum dred or two hundred thousand. If, on the other hand, I capitalized at four hundred thousand dollars, the shares would sell at fifty and that would not make very much difference.
 "The gentleman who opened this confer erce, Professor Jenks, in the admissible statement which placed the issues for our consideration so clearly before us, meant to restrict this question of over-ca pttaliza- tion to the instance of a newspaper which was earning a. hundred thousand dollars a year. I think 1t was $1,0G0 900, and yet 1t could be produced for a hundred thousand dollars except the editor Qaughter), and he asked, Is it fair? How are you going to capitalize that? The answer is very sim ple Tell the truth to the public what you have got, and capitalize it as you please. Laughter).
 swindIe vs. Operation
 "If an industry capitalized for $5 900, ,OO0 knowing that 1t could not pay dividends upon one, and then without positive false- 1 hood deceive them by what is commonly | called in finance chicanery so as to induce l them to buy at a fabulous value, I call | that q swindle, and it would be called a | swindle if it were perpetrated against a | Shoe dealer on the Bowery, where it is often called an operation. Oaughter). Now, my friends, the remedy for all | evils, in my judgment, is the original rem : edy which I uggested-publicity, publicity. l The hatred of corpora tions, which I say is 1 not wholly justified is not discredft able to 1 the public opinion of America In fact 1 lay 1t down as a cardinal rule, which I 1 think any person can follow with perfect safely that wherever we find a general l opinion any subject in America, there ] is always a pretty good ground for ii. 1 The distrust of corpora tions arises not, in | my judgment, from any Well considered | dislike to corporation entities. My friend | from Texas, whose eloquent periods on the l first day of our session moved this body as | I have not seen it moved was careful to | distinguish between corporations which | acted for the public good and those which l acted for the oppression of the public. l | am not quite sure that I understand the l distinction from his words, but I think he sympa thized, like I do, in our feelings We don't object to the principle of co-opera- | ton.
 1 Evolution of Partnership
 Corporate existence is the natural evo- lution of the partnership. But the man.
 
 | biackest page in all of our history. You | have only to look back to the history of
 the panic of 1873 and the history of the
 panic of 1893 and the corporate manage
 ment that preceded that panic, and you find corporations wrecked and footed by
 thost to whose heads they were entrusted
 their treasuries empty, worthless property l sold to them that were but small and in | the disguise of truth.
 "For all this, my friends the remedy, | repeat, is publicity. A statute which would l modify but slightly, if at all, the existing | laws of every state would make this species
 of fraud impossible. They tell you it is | private business. No honest man ever yet | discharging a duty for another claims the | cloak of secrecy. This is the badge of | fraud. No corporal ton anxious to perform | honest services to the public and its stock 1 holders will seek secrecy or will insist on | it. It is the cloak behind which all these | frauds are perpetrated-the false pretense l of paying dividends, which have not been | earned; the false pretenses about earnings; | false pretenses made up of false book l keeping. An owner of stock in corpora ' ton should have the right to examine it's