The daily morning journal and courier., 1905-12-06

responsible by, and be accountable to, some sovereign strong enough to con- trol its conduct. 1 am in no sense hos tile to corporations This is an age of combination, and any effort to prevent all combination will be not only useless but in the end vicious, because of the contempt for law which the failure to enforce law inevitably produces. we should, moreover, recongize in cordial and ample fashion the immense good effected by corporate agencies in a country such as ours, and the wealth of intellect, energy and fidelity devoted to their service, and therefore normally to the service of the public, by their officers and directors. The corporation has come to stay, just as the trade union has come to stay. Each can do and has done great good. Each should be favored so long as it does good. But each should be sharply checked where it acts against law and justice.
 So long as the finances of the Nation are kept upon an honest basis no other question of internal economy with which the Congress has the power to deal begins to approach in importance the matter of endeavoring to secure proper industrial conditions under which the individuals-and especially the great corporations-doing an inter- state business are to act. The makers of our National Constitution provided especially that the regulation of inter- state commerce should come within the sphere of the General Government. The fo of 4l,se stand were even then overwhelming But they are far stronger to-day, in view of the enormous development of great business agencies, usually cor porate in form. Experience has shown exclusively that it is useless to try to get any adequate regulation and super vision of these great corporations by state action. Such regulation and su- pervision can only be effectively exer- cised by a sovereign whose jurisdiction is coextensive with the field of work of the corporations-tha is, by the Ma tional Government. believe that this regulation and supervision can be ob- tained by the enactment of law by the Congress. If this proves impossible, it will certainly be necessary ultimately to confer in fullest form such power upon the National Government by a proper amendment of the Constitution. It would obviously be unwise to en- deavor to secure such an amendment until it is certain that the result can- not be obtained under the Constitution as it now is. The laws of the Congress and of the several states hitherto, as Lxy 1ax suited more often in showing that the states have no power in the matter than that the National Government has power; so that there at present exists very unfortunate condition of things, under which these great corporations doing an interstate business occupy the position of subjects without a sov- ereign, neither any state government nor the National Government having effective control over them. Our steady aim should be by legislation, cautiously and carefully undertaken, but resolute- ly Dersevered in, to assert the sov- ereignty of the National Government by affirmative action.
 This is only in for man innovation In substance it is merely a restoration; for from the earliest time such regu- lation of industrial activities has been recognized in the action of the law making bodies; and all that I propose is to meet the changed conditions in such manner as will prevent the Com monwealth abdicating the power it has always possessed. not only in this country but also in England before and since this country became a sepa- rate Nation.
 It has been a misfortune that the national laws on this subject have hitherto been of negative or prohibi- tive rather than an affirmative kind and still more that they have in part sought to prohibit what could not be effectively prohibited, and have in part in their prohibitions confounded what should be allowed and what should not be allowed. It is generally useless to try to prohibit all restraint on compe- tition, whether this restraint be req sonabl or unreasonable; and where it is not useless it is generally hurtful,