The Forest Republican. [volume] (Tionesta, Pa.) 1869-1952, 1907-12-04

recognize that this control must come.
The only question is as to what gov
| ernmental body can most wisely exer-
else 1t. The courts will determine the
limits within which the federal author
ity can exercise it, and there will still
remain ample work within each state
| for the railway commission of that
state, and the national interstate COM
merce commission will work in har-
mony with the several state commits
sions, each within its own province, to
achieve the desired end.
Tho Antitrust Law.
Moreover, in my judgment there
should be additional legislation looking
to the proper control of the great busi-
ness concerns engaged in interstate
business. this control to be exercised
for their own benefit and prosperity
no less than for the protection of In
vestors and Of the general public. AS
have repeatedly said in messages to
congress and elsewhere, experience has
definitely shown not merely the unwis-
| dom. but the futility, of endeavoring to
| put stop to all business combinations.
Modern industrial conditions are such
that combination Is not only necessary,
but inevitable 1t is so in the world of
business Just as it is so In the world
of labor, and it is as idle to desire to put
an end to all corporations, to all big
combinations Of capital, as to desire to
nj 10 In ~ Ioh
Corporation and labor union alike have
come to stay. Each If properly man
| aged is source of good and not evil.
Whenever in either there is evil 1t
should be promptly held to account.
but 1t should receive hearty encourage
ment so long as it is properly managed.
1t Is profoundly immoral to put or
keep on the statute books law nomi
nally in the interest of public morality
that really puts a premium upon pub
lie immortality by undertaking to for
bid honest men from doing what must
be done under modern business condi-
tlons so that the law itself provides
that its own infraction must be the
condition precedent upon business sue
cess. TO aim at the accomplishment
| plishment of too little and often the do
ing of positive damage.
Not Repeal, but Amendment.
The antitrust law should not be re.
pealed, but 1t should be made both
more efficient and more in harmony
with actual conditions. 1t should be
so amended as to forbid only the kind
of combination which does harm to the
general public, such amendment to be
accompanied by or to be an incident Of
a grant of supervisory power to the
government over these big concerns
engaged in interstate business. This
should be accompanied by provision
for the compulsory publication Of ac-
counts and the subsection of books and
papers to the inspection of the gov
ernment officials. A beginning has al
ready been made for such supervision
by the establishment Of the bureau of
corporations.
The antitrust law should not prohibit
combinations that do no injustice to
the public, still less those the existence
of which Is on the whole Of benefit
to the public. But even if this feature
of the law were abolished there would
remain us an equally Objectionable fea-
ture the difficulty and delay now Incl
dent to its enforcement. The govern
ment must now submit to irksome and
repeated delay before obtaining final
decision Of the courts upon proceedings
instituted. and even a favorable de-
cree may mean an empty victory.
Moreover, to attempt to control these
corporations by lawsuits means to i'm
pose upon both the department Of
justice and the courts an impossible
burden. 1t is not feasible to carry on
more than limited number Of such
suits. Such a law to be really effec-
tive must of course be administered
by an executive body and not merely
by means of lawsuits. The design
should be to prevent the abuses Incl
dent to the creation of unhealthy and
improper combinations instead of wait
ing until they are in existence and
then attempting to destroy them by
civil or criminal proceedings.
Law Should Be Explicit.
A combination should not be tolerat-
ed If 1t abuse the power acquired by
combination to the public detriment.
No corporation or association of any
kind should be permitted to engage in
foreign or interstate commerce that is
formed for the purpose of or whose
operations create a monopoly or gen.
eral control of the production, sale or
distribution of any one or more Of the
prime necessities of life or articles Of
general use and necessity. Such COM
binations are against public policy.
They violate the common law. The
doors Of the courts are closed to those
who are parties to them, and believe
the congress can close the channels of
interstate commerce against them for
its protection. The law should make
its prohibitions and permissions as
clear and definite as possible, leaving
the least possible room for arbitrary
action or allegation of such action on
the part of the executive or Of diver
gent interpretations by the courts.
Among the points to be aimed at
should be the prohibition of unhealthy
competition, such as by rendering serv-
ice at an actual loss for the purpose of
crushing out competition, the preven-
tlon of imitation of capital aNd the pro-