The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1907-08-23

10 RTaDDle With Liz NJ VI ~ odllC
%scrupulous to safeguard the rights of cor
porations as to exact from them in return
8 full measure of justice to the public. l
believe in q national Incorporation law for
corporations engaged in interstate bust
ness. l believe. furthermore. that the need
for action is most pressing as resaras
are common carriers, exercise a quasi-pup-
lie function; and which can be completely
controlled. in all respects by the federal
government, by the exercise of the power
clause, and, If necessary, under the post
road clause, of the constitution.
Like Control of Eanko.
During the last few years We have taken
marked strides in advance along the road
of proper regulation of these railroad cor
porations: but we must not stop In the
work. The national government should
exercise over them a similar supervision
national banks. We can do this only. by
proceeding farther along the lines marked
out by the recent national legislation.
conditions there must at the outset be
hesitation and experiment. Such has been
our experience In dealing with the enor-
nous concentration of capital employed IN
Interstate. business. Not only the legtsla-
lures hut the courts and the people heed
gradually to be educated so that they may
real remedies. Almost every big business
concern is engaged in interstate commerce.
and such q concern must not be allowed by
a de%xterous shifting Of position. as has
been too often the case In the past. to es-
cape thereby all responsibility either TO
state or to nation. The American people
became firmly convinced of the need OF
control over these great a~ggregations or
capital. especially where they had a mon
opolistic tendency, before they became
quite clear as to the proper way OF achlev-
atives in congress they tried two remedies.
which were TO a large degree, at ieast as
interpreted by the courts, contradictory
On the one hand, under the antitrust law
%bination. whether it was or was not hurt-
full or beneficial to the public.
The Sherman Law.
On the other hand, through the interstate
commerce law a beginning was made In
exercising such supervision and control
over combinations as to prevent their do
ing anything harmful to the body polite.
The first law. the so-called sherman law,
the transition period until the American
people shall definitely make up Its mind
that 1t will exercise over the great cor,
poratiens that thoroughgoing and radical
control which 1t is certain ultimately to
ind necessary.
The principle Of the Sherman law so far
as 1t prohibits combinations which, Wheth-
er because Of their extent or Of their char
acter, are harmful to the public must al
ways be preserved.
ultimately, and I hope with reasonable
speed, the national government must pass
laws which, while increasing the super
visory and regulatory4power of the gov
eminent, also permits such useful comb.n-
etions as are made with absolute openness
and as the representatives of the govern.
ment may previously approve. But 1t will
not be possible to permit such combina-
of proceedings Of which the first stage
must be the exercise of a far more COM
plete control by the national government.
Criminality.
In dealing with those who offend against
the antitrust and interstate commerce
laws the department of justice has to en-
counter many and great difficulties. Often
men who have been guilty of violating
these laws have really. acted in criminal
cecded against c~riminally: and therefore
it is advisable that there should be a
clause in these laws providing for such
imprisonment as we'll as by fine. But, as
is we'll known, in a criminal action the law
Is strictly construed in favor of the de-
PENDANT, and in our country, at least, both
Judge and jury are far more Inclined to
consider his rights than they are the IN
terests OF the general public; while in ad-
d.tion It is always true that a mans gen,
action will lie when 1t may not be possible
to convict him Of any one criminal act.
There is unfortunately a certain number
accept the view that unless a man can be
proved guilty of some particular crime he
shall be counted a good citizen, no matter
how Infamous the life he has led, no mat
tire how pernicious his doctrines or his
practices. This is the View announced
from time to time with G.amorous insist
ence, now by a group of predatory cap!-
chistic leaders and agitators, whenever
a special champion Of either class, no mat
ter how evil his general l.fe, is acquitted
of some. one specific crime. Such a view
is wicked whether applied to capitalist or
labor leader, to rich man or poor man.
But we have to take this feeling into &C
count when we are debating whether it is
possible to get a conviction in a criminal
proceeding against some rich trust mag
nate, many of whose actions are severely
to be condemned from the moral and So
ctal standpoint, but no one of whose ac-
tons seems clearly to establish such tech
nical guilt as will insure a conviction. IS
a matter of expediency. in enforcing the
continually to weigh the arguments pre-
and con as to whether a prosecution can
successfully be entered into, and as te
nal action against the chief individuals ir
the corporation. and If not whether we car
at least be successful in civil actor
effective action on the part q
to, as a matter Of course, by
and often one of the most effective ways
of attacking the action OF the government
IS by objecting to practical action upoI
the ground that it does not go fal
enough. One of the favorite devices Of
those who are really striving to proven
the enforcement of these laws is to clamol
for action of such severity that 1t can no
be undertaken because 1t will be certain
to fail If tried.
Tho Licorice Trust.
An instance of this is the demand ofte,
made for criminal prosecutions where sucl
prosecutions would be certain to fail. w
have found by actual experience that
jury which will gladly punish a corpora
ton by fine, for instance. will acqu.t tn,
individual members of that corporation i
we proceed against them, crim.nally be
cause Of those very things which the cor
porat.on which they direct and contro
has done.
In a recent case against the licorice trus
we indicted and tried the two corporations
and their respective presidents. The con
tracts and other transactions establishin,
the guilt OF the corporations were mad,
through. and so far as they were in writ
ing were signed by, the two presidents.
Yet the jury convicted the two corpora
tons and acquitted the two men. Bot
verdicts could not possibly have been cor
rect: but apparently the average jurymal
wishes to see trusts broken up and !
quite ready to fine the corporation itself
but is very reluctant to find the fact
proven beyond a reasonable doubt whe1
II comes to sending to 1ail a renOtah hi