Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1907-08-29

demically, but from the standpoint of the
interests of the people as a whole. Ma
tiopal sovereignty is to be upheld in so lar
as it means the sovereignty of the people
used for the real and ultimate good of the
people; and States rights are to be upheld
in so far as they mean the peoples rights.
Especially is this true in dealing with the
relations OF the people a a whole to the
great corporations which are the distln-
gushing feature of modern business condi-
tions.
Greater Control Needed.
Experience he's shown that it is neces-
sary to exercise a far more efficient control
than at present over the business use or
those vast fortunes, chiefly corporate, which
are used (aS under modern conditions they
almost invariably are) in Interstate bust
ness When the constitution created
none of the conditions of modern business
existed They are wholly new, and we
must create new agencies to deal effectively
with them There is objection in the
minds of the people to any mans earning
any amount of money If he does 1t honestly
and fairly, If he gets 1t as the result of
special skill and enterprise as reward OF
ample service actually rendered. But there
is a growing determination that no man
shall amaSS a great fortune by special
privilege, by chicanery and wrongdotng, so
far as it is in the power of legislation to
prevent, and that the fortune when amassed
shall not have a business use that is anti
social Most large corporations do bust
ness that is not confined to any one State.
Experience has shown that the effort to
control these corporations by mere State &C
ton cannot produce wholesome results. In
most cases such effort fails to correct the
real abuses of which the corporation is or
may be guilty while in other cases the
effort is apt to cause either hardship to the
corporation itself else hardship to neigh
boring States which have not tried to Crap
pie with the problem in the same manner,
and. of course, we must be as scrupuous to
safeguard the rights of the corporations
thnOn in n full
OF justice 10 the public.
Nation should Control.
Il believe in a national corporation law
for corporations engaged in interstate bust
ness. | believe, furthermore. that the need
for action IS most pressing as regards those
corporations which. because they are COM
mon carriers exercise a quasi-public func
ton, and which can be completely con-
troled in all respects by the federal gov
eminent, by the exercise of the power con
ferred under the interstate commerce
clause. and. if necessary. under the post road
clause, of the constitution. During the last
few years we have taken marked strides in
advance along the road of proper regula-
ton of these railroad corporations, but we
must not stop in the work. The national
government should exercise over them a
similar supervision and control to that
which ii exercises over national banks. We
can do this only by proceeding farther along
the lines marked out by the recent national
legislation.
In dealing with any totally new set of
conditions there must at the outset be hest
tation and experiment Such has been our
experience in dealing with the enormous
concentration of capital employed in inter
state business. Not only the legislatures
but the courts and the people need gradu-
ally to be educated so that they may see
| what the real wrongs are and what the
real remedies.
Guilty Not TO Escape.
Almost every big business concern is
| engaged in Interstate commerce, and such
| a concern must not be allowed by a dex-
| ferrous shifting of position, as has been too
| often the case in the past TO escape thereby
| all responsibility, either to state or to ma
! ton. The American people became firmly
| convinced of the need of control over these
! great aggregationS of capital, especially
! where they had a monopolistic tendency.
| before they became quite clear as to the
proper way of achieving the control.
| Through their representatives in Congress
| they tried two remedies. which to a
| large degree. at least interpreted by the
| courts, contradictory. On the one hand,
| under the antitrust law the effort was
| made to prohibit all combination. whether
! il was or was not hurtful or beneficial rs
| the public. on the other hand. through the
! interstate commerce law beginning was
| made in exercising such supervision and
| control over combinations as to prevent
| their doing anything harmful to the body
| polite. The first law, the so-called Sher-
| man law, has filled useful place; for it
| bridges over Cne lEanSlIl0n period untll the
! American people shall definitely make up
| its mind that it will exercise over the great
corporations that thoroughgoing and radi-
| cal control which it is certain ultimately to
! find necessary. The principle of the Sher-
| man law, so far as it prohibits combina-
! tons which, whether because of their extent
| or of their character, are harmful TO the
| public must always be preserved. Ulti-
| mately. and l hope with reasonable speed.
| the national government must pass laws
| which. while Increasing the supervisory and
| regulatory power of the government. also
! permits such useful combinations as are
| made with absolute openneSs and as the
! representatives of the government may pre-
| viously approve. But 1t will not be pos
| Sible TO permit such combinations save as
| the second stage in a course Of proceedings
| of which the first stage must be the exercise
| of a far more complete control by the ma
| tional government.
Punishment in Prison.
I'm 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 fashion,
and if possible should be proceeded against
criminally: and therefore it is advisable
that there should be q change in these laws
! providing for such criminal action, and for
punishment Ivy imprisonment as well as by
liDe. But as is well known, in 4 criminal
action the law is strictly construed in favor
of tie defendant. and in our country. al
| least. both Judge and jury are far more N
cliDed to consider his rights than they arc
the interests OF the general pubiic: while
IN addition it IS always true JE3t man
general practices may Ee 50 bad that civil
action viii lie when it may not De possible