New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1907-01-23

Entered in the nostoffice at NewUlnl.
Minn. as second class matter.
Peter 5. Grosscup, judge of the fed
eral circuit court of appeals, is jurist
who thinks about many other things
than the cases that come before him.
He has been thinking a good bit about
the corporation problem, and in re-
cent issue of the Outlook asks whether
we are on the right track. He points
cut, justly enough, that thus far the
abatement Of corporation evils has
been sought in but two ways by de-
nunciation and by lawsuits. The prin-
cipal proponents of the former are
men like Hearst and Bryan, and ofthe
latter, men like Roosevelt and Hughes.
There is, of course, the solution offered
by the socialists of government owner
ship, SO repugnant to the American in
e7ividualistic ideal, to the instinct for
property ownership, which has been
the handspring of our development
from colonial times.
Competition is not to be restored by
making Incorporation an alien. Nor,
in Judge Grosscup's view, is it to be
restored by lawsuits. When corpora
lions are enjoined from conspiring to
tx prices, they merge naturally into
one large corporation, which cannot
be reached by existing law. The
policy of isolating the corporation,
whether By denunciations Or by law
suits, can never build up Competitors.
san never restore to the people the
ownership of property which is rapid
1y being taken away from them.
What then, is Judge Grosscup's So
luton? In word, he would have the
corporation itself reformed and made
republican. The reconstructed COR
poration must have no place in it
For schemes Of spoliation that plumber
either those whose capital has created
It Or those whose patronage supports
it. Securities issued must have some
regulated relation to the values actu-
ally put in. The officers must be held
TO strict accountability as trustees
and not permitted to make profit out
of their trust. There must be tangible
Inducements to every employee from
highest TO lowest to secure a share in
the proprietorship.
Judge Grosscup points out that Ger
many some thirty years ago went thru
such a period of reconstruction and
shat principles substantially identical
with those he lays down now rule in
that country. Officers and directors
are not supreme in Germany, and
shareholders meetings are as demo
cratic as the New England town meet
ing. No new corporation can be or
ganized until 1t has proved it's right to
existence and had it's capitalization
carefully scrutinized. The result is
that proprietorship is distributed
among the people, not consecrated in
q few hands. To this policy is at
tributable in largs"measure the as
sounding growth of modern German
5ndustrialism. It is noteworthy that
there is now no corporation question
IN Germany and that the attacks of
socialism are directed solely at the
unjust landed proprietorship and its
eorollary Of militarism.
Altogether Judge Grosscup's dis
eussion is Illuminating. Probably
he would not have the government
discontinue it's efforts to force cor
porations to obey the existing laws.
But the law-making powers should be
turned into the channel of reforming
and republicanizing and humanizing
the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Jour
nal.