The Washington herald., 1907-08-21
Mr.. Roosevelrs Address-A Comparison.


President Roosevelts Provincetown ad-
dress. following closely upon Mr.. Tafts
elaborate review OF administration poll
cies. invites contrast and comparison. The
President lays down anew the broad lines
of his programme for corporation con-
troll, which aims at the Federal regula-
ton of all common carriers and OF all
corporations doing business in more than
one State. For the former he proposes
such supervision and control as the na-
tional government exercises over national
banks. and for the latter he would pro-
vide a national Incorporation law. The
supervisory and regulatory power OF the
Fedora! government over great combina-
tions OF capital he is convinced must be
largely increased, for, in his opinion,
State control OF corporations doing inter-
state business cannot produce whole
some results. While inhibiting combina-
tions harmful 10 the public, he would
permit such useful combinations as are
made with absolute openness and as the
representatives Of the government may
previously approve"
mitted himself to the whole OF this am
bilious programme. lie obviously keeps
in mind the distinction between corpora
tons performing public function, Ike
the common carriers, whose regulation is
by the Constitution committed 10 Con-
gTess, and those industrial corporations
which Congress has no constitutional
power 10 regulate, save as such power
may be assumed through the dependence
OF industrial combinations on interstate
commerce for their very being. Mr.. Taft
does not hesitate TO recommend more
stringent measures OF railway control
while he IS doubtful about the necessity
or legality of analogous measures affect
ing industrial corporations. So his reply
to Mr.. Bryan's inquiry as 10 what lie
would do with the trusts is a very simple
one: 4 would restrain unlawful trusts
with all the efficiency OF injunctive
process. and would punish with all the.
severity Of criminal prosecution every at
tempt on the part of aggregated capital
through illegal means 10 suppress compe-
tition" II is a far cry from this remedy
for trust evils TO Mr.. Roosevelts pro-
posal for a national incorporation law.
AS 10 that proposal it may be observed.
Mr.. Taft was discreetly silent, though
his opinion Of it may, perhaps, be inferred
from his disapproval Of the Federal
license plan.
Both Mr.. Roosevelt and his Secretary
| Of War are In harmony on the subject OF
enforcing III antitrust law by both civil
and criminal process. Mr.. Roosevelt
points out very clearly the difficulties
in the way OF putting some prominent
man in jail" and appears not to be in
entire sympathy with the public clamor
which demands the execution of some
such legal feat. He does not favor criui-
nal prosecutions where they would be
pretty certain to fail, and. in general, pre-
/ fers, If we correctly judge the tenor Of
/ his language, that the legal proceedings
TO enforce the antitrust law shall be
| effective, rather than dramatic and spec
/ tacular. Nevertheless, he fully approves
! the receivership method Of compelling
/ trusts 70 reform as a device calculated
/ 10 stamp out corporate wrongdoing.
! Criminal prosecution Of corporate Of
| tenders where possible, and the enforce
ment Of the antitrust and interstate COM
merce laws all along the line, then. is the
| Presidential policy now, as it has been
| heretofore. Those who have hoped for
! some alteration Of the Executive purpose
Will be disappointed In the Presidents 3
I address. which affords no encouragement
| TO corporate lawbreakers. Nor does It
! threaten legitimate business enterprise OF
menace the welI-foinded prosperity Of
/ the country. There may be differences OF
| opinion as to details of the Rooseveltian
| pOlicies-differences which Mr.. Taft does
not attempt TO COnceal-but we have en-
! tire confidence In their main purpose to
/ bring about equitable relations between
/ the corporations and the people. and to
/ establish equality OF opportunity for all
men.