The Glenwood post., 1907-08-24

remedies, which were. TO a large de-
gree, at least as interpreted by the
courts. contradictory On the one hand.
under the antitrust law, the effort was
made to prohibit all combination,
whether it was or was not hurtful or
beneficial to the public. On the other
hand. through the interstate commerce
law, a beginning was made in exercis
ing such supervision and control over
combinations as to prevent their do
ing anything harmful to the body poll
tic. The first law, the so-called Sher
man law. has filled a useful place, for
1t bridges over the transition period
until the American people shall detin-
itely make up its mind that 1t will eX-
ercise over the great corporations
that thoroughgoing and radical control
which it is certain ultimately to find
necessary. The principle of the Sher-
man law, so far as 1t prohibits com
binations which, whether because OF
their extent or of their character, are
harmful to the public. must always be
preserved. Ultimately. and hope with
reasonable speed, the national govern
ment must pass laws which. while in
creasing the supervisory and regula
tory power of the government, also
permit such useful combinations as are
made with absolute openness and as
the representatives of the government
may previously approve. But it will
not be possible to permit such combi-
nations save as the second stage in
course of proceedings of which the
first stage must be the exercise of a
far more complete control by the ma
tional government.
In dealing with those who offend
against the antitrust and interstate
commerce laws the Department of JUS
tice has to encounter many and great
difficulties. Often men who have been
guilty of violating these laws have re-
ally acted in criminal fashion and if
possible should be proceeded against
crminally, and therefore it is advis-
able that there should be clause in
these laws providing for such criminal
action and for punishment by impris-
onment as well as by fine But, as is
well known, in a criminal action the
law is strictly construed in favor of
the defendant, and in our country at
least, both judge and jury are far more
inclined to consider his rights than
they are the interests of the general
public; while in addition it is always
true that a mans general practices
may be so bad that a civil action will
lie when it may not be possible to con-
vict him of any one criminal act.
The Undesirable Citizen.
There is unfortunately certain
of our fellow countrymen who
seem to accept the view that unless
man can be proved guilty of some par
ticular crime he shall be counted
good citizen, no matter how infamous
the life he has led, no matter how per-
nicious his doctrines or his practices.
This is the view announced from time
to time with clamorous inSistence now
by group of predatory capitalists,
now by group of sinister anarchistic
leaders and agitators whenever a spe-
cial champion Of either class, no mat
ter how evil his general life, is ac.
quilted of some one specific crime
Such view is wicked whether applied
to capitalist or labor leader, to rich
man or poor man. But we have to take
this feeling into account when we are
debating whether it is possible to get
a conviction in a criminal proceeding
against some rich trust magnate, many
Of whose actions are severely to be
from the moral and social
but no one of whose ac-
tions seems clearly to establish such
technical guilt as will insure a convic
tion. AS matter of expediency in en-
forcing the law against great corpor-
alton we have continually to weigh the
arguments pro and con as to whether
a prosecution can successfully be en-
tered into. and as to whether We can
be successful in criminal action
against the chief individuals in the
and if not, whether we
can at least be successful in a civil ac-
ton against the corporation itself
Any effective action on the part of the
government is always objected to, as
/ matter Of course, by the wrongdoers,
by the beneflciaries of the wrongdoers
and by their champions; and often one
a~n 80