The San Francisco call., 1907-03-03

brief for the railroads and
trusts. IN The Federal Power
over Carriers and Corporations" The
book is OF interest because Of the Sc
rious inquiry the author has made into
the powers Of. States In regard to cor
poration control taken in connection
with the powers granted by the con-
stitution TO the general government.
The preface indicates the authors atti-
tude 70 be that OF the strict constitu-
tlonalist and he Is openly against the
plans OF the present administration,
Z Tor Federal regulation. Federal incor-
poration and Federal licenses. He says
81 part:
The present work deals, as its title
sndicstes. with the nature and extent
OF powers belonging TO the general
government, not with Congressional
legislation. The statute, however, the
set OF July ?, 1890, popularly known as
the SHERMAN antitrust act, so closely
concerns the principles OF government
that Il has required a full considera-
tion.
1T is common IN discussing these
questions largely 10 disregard the pur-
poses which influenced the formation
OF our Government and FOR century
directed its administration. Present
questions II is urged, are new, beyond
the contemplation Of the statesmen OF
. century ago, and new meanings must,
therefore, be given TO the constitution.
This Is surely most dangerous and
mistaken notion. The nature Of man
and the principles OF government are
not changed. Personal liberty is as
precious as OF old, and its preserva-
ton is still OF first Importance. The
influences which endanger free govern
ment and, II unrestrained, lead to the
license OF the mob or 70 arbitrary rule.
are present in our people, as i'm all
otners. That so many persons are
feaoy, without very serious considera-
ton OF the structure OF government. to
approve any method which seems TO
promise effective control OF CORPORA
tions, shows that the American people
have so long lived in consciousness OF
complete safety for all private rights,
that the methods by which, in the for
nation OF the constitution, individuals
were protected against arbitrary
power seem no longer TO demand at
tention.
The constitution is a historical docu-
uent- Its meaning. and the interpre-
tations II has received as tho final ad-
publications OF time and authority, can.
De determined only BY taking the de-
clslons which have construed its terms
"a connection with contemporaneous
condition and by study OF constitu-
tional practice OF States and Congress.
Cases Of latest date however. are COM
monty those which carry. greatest au-
tnoritN There has been q tendency
therefore. in reading opinions of tbe-
supreme Court, TO accept each decision
IS new point OF departure. In con-
sequence, some OF the earlier cases.
upon which Il IS now sought TO bufld
FURTHER extensions OF Federal Dower-
IS, Tor example, the famous case OF
GIBBONS VS. Ogden. decided bv Mr.
Cniet Justice Marshall in ISa4-hsve
oeen quoted as establishing doctrines
which their fllustrious authors Vould
nave been first 10 deny. This method
o. colsLr uction has never received the
epproval OF the Supreme Court
Mr. Prentice declares that the consff-
tuition OF the United States is being
twisted about from year to year not TO
meet real changes in the conditions ~
the country, but TO 1T the demands OF
the oampaigners against the trusts
some time ago Secretary Root said IN
q notable speech that unless the states
fesulateo railways the Federal Govern
nlent must DO so, and CONSTRUCTIONS .,
the constitution would be found - -
eple Il TO do so. This condition Of az
fsirs. says Mr.. Prentice is not
prophecy, but an existent fac. and he
points with warning moral: Coneress
DoW assumes 70 90 what once Il was de-
nieo the power 70 do. The constitution
So being construed TO have nesninQ.
80 -
form Following this lead lies the
wreck OF our institutions, and the only
remedy suggested is the passing Of an
other amendment, and thus acting upon
the constitution itself and its original
teachings.
In an interesting chapter on THE
Antitrust Act" Mr.. Prentice has this
% say 1T Is OF great Importance. then.
that State jurisdiction over corporations
should be understood; that IL should be
known that there is no practical neces-
eity which compels Congress and the
courts to supersede this jurisdiction:
but, on the contrary. that, so far as con-
Germs constitutional law. the practical
cffi7culties Ia the way OF corporate con-
troll result from recent efforts TO limit
State authority. That State
jurisdiction IS adequate TO reach the
commercial conditions from which has
arisen the current demand for trust
legislation is shown by the fact that
these conditions have been brought
about by recent modification OF State
laws -
a great market makes a great busl-
ness. and State laws permit great ag-
greRatfons of capital Both conditions
must unite to make a great corpora
tion possib ble. and both are within the
power OF each State 70 control for
itself inequality among competitors
may be limited directly by restricting
the amount OF property which a cor
poration- may hold, or the limitation
may be imposed indirectly by restrict
fng the market IN which corporation
may deal. Any State which so desirec
may establish its conditions OF compe-
tition by requiring all who conduct
business IN corporate form within its
territory TO organize under its laws:
forbidoing its corporations 20 hold
stock IN other companies, and forbid
lire foreign companies 60 acquire title