The Washington herald., 1906-11-03
Constructive Anti.Trust Law.

AIr. Roots detailed recital, in h-s Utica
speech. Of the actual work done by the
Department Of Justice IN the prosecution
Of corporate WT0ngdCing is an impressive
one. The mere record itself Is sufficient
70 acquit the administration Of Iukewarm-
ness, with which 1t has been so often
charged. when the slow processes of the
courts have not seemed to reach the
evils complained Of quickly enough to suit
hasty critics. The magnitude Of the tass
undertaken by the administration when
the trust prosecutions were begun has
not been generally appreciated. We think.
even by those who have been Ioudest IN
demanding that drastic action be taken
against Illegal combinations Of capital
and the unlawful practices of legal cor
porations. The legal officers of the gov
eminent had TO blaze a trail through the
tangled meshes Of the law before they
could clear away the obstacles to en-
forcement Of the antitrust act. and this
the5 did, as Mr.. Root well SAYS, only by
The application of skill. ability, and en-
ergy Of the highest order.
When MT Bryan attacked trusts, ten
years ago, il IS scarcely too much 20 say
that 10 one knew exactly how to reach a
vulnerable spot in the trust armor.
few years before New York and Ohio had
compelled the dissolution Of the sugar
and Standard Oil trusts. respectively; but
these trusts were clumsiIy organized. and
their promoters soon found a way to re-
organize upon stronger foundations The
new combinations were corporati< rs given
authority in their charters to hold the
stock OF subsidiary companies, privi-
lege which had been found TO be beyond
the legal competence Of the original
trust These great combinations stand
to-day. and the question whether they
are invulnerable remains to be determined
by the courts. That they can be attacked
in the courts al all is due TO an invasion
Of a fed OF action heretofore considered
as appeTtaining solely to the States grant
ing corporation charters. "The Federal
government" Mr.. Root tells US, has been
met at every turn by the difficulty Of
controlling State corporations in the ex-
crcise Of the powers conferred upon them
by the State in which they were created
Air- Bryan proposed TO meet this dITcuIty
by & constitutional amendment giving the
.
tions, but the practical imposyfbiIity Of
sec'iyir g amendments TO the Federal Con
stituti0n would have barred almost indef-
niteiy the application Of this remedy.
The way ia which the difficulty was az
last overcome IS significant Of the funda-
mental division between the two great
parties which have for many years str,5g-
gled for the mastery OF our national des-
TIMES II was done by setting aside the
state rights peas behind which the cor
porations sought % shield themselves
and ny extending the Federal power
thro7gh constructive Interpretation Of the
Constitution. IL two important cases the
Federal law officers advanced contentious
at variance with alleged rights of the
States. both Of which were upheld by the
Supreme Court Thrs it was established
as the law Of the land that no CORPORATION
could defend itself from wrongdoing on
The plea that il had been chartered to do
wrong by a State Il was also estsb-
hshed THAI the interstate clause Of the
Constitution gives the Federal govern
ment au' hoTitv TO deal with corDeratsons
doing interstate business. and that no
corporation could successfully defend
wrongdoing on The plea that the States
alone can deal with manufacturing cor
porations.
This substantial achievement marks
distinct advance IN the constructive
craftsmanship by which, since the 6avs
Of Marshall, our great and enduring na-
tionaI fabric has been built up.
II is sane and wholesome advance
and fun Of promise that the future nav
develop sound and normal methods Of
coping with the serious problems pre-
sented by swollen fortunes and enormous
aggregations Of capital