The daily morning journal and courier., 1907-11-04
4 rR0UBLESOME LAT.


 n7and is being made here and there for the repeal of the Sherman Anti Trust law, so-called. The purpose of this law is plainly stated in phrase ology that has become familiar to ev- cry reader who has informed himself concerning the industrial tendencies for the past twenty years or more. The principal object of this law is to forbid combinations in restraint of trade" For a considerable period of time the astonishing rapidity with which small industries were being merged in large concerns was watched solicitously. Danger to competition in business was foreshadowed, if this dis position to combine competing capitals were to continue uncurbed. There was a genuine alarm felt. It was believed that competition among large num- Der of comparatively small business concerns must in some way be pre- served. Therefore the antitrust law was enacted to prevent combination. It was supposed that the purpose of combination was to restrain trade. In certain particulars some combinations did have an apparent effect in re- etraining trade, in as far as they had the power to lessen output whenever it seemed convenient or could harness smaller businesses in the same line of production, but in the sense of prevent ing actual trade it is inconceivable that any combination would undertake such task. Combinations simply di- verted trade from smaller concerns and the competitive field to themselves.
 Combinations are inevitable and a necessity in economic and industrial evolution. Greater economy and ef- iciency in operation can be secured by associated capitals than by number of competing capitals. With increas- ing population and the numerous pro- .jeets ttat require operations on large scale there comes a demand for capi- tai commensurate with the character of the undertaking and under the man. agement of one organization in order to produce the best results. To at tempt to prohibit combination and cor porate management in this stage of in- dustrial evolution is like an attempt to turn. time backward.
 The danger to general welfare comes from the peculiar power which com bination gives to those who are quick to use 1t for selfish monopolistic ends To make combinations useful in such a manner that the benefits of the larg- CT way of doing things shall inure in some just measure to public good is the task. This requires laws that will supervise these combinations in the interests of the people while at the same time allowing for industrial growth,
 According to the proceedings of the National Civic Federation on trusts" held recently in Chicago the sherman Antitrust law is not regarded as any special blessing and should be repeal ed. Iii 1890 when the law was enacted + might have been believed that the law was adequate to meet the situa- ton and that obnoxious conbinations could be ordered to dissolve and ;heir cGn'tal divided into competing .ali- tals, but seventeen years ha ie pro1uc- ed a change in opinion. If the Sher- man Antitrust law had continued to He a dead letter, unenforce1 practi- csliy for years, it would have stirred no debate whatever. But President Roosevelt took the posi- ion that if a law was not a good one it should he repealed and better one substituted. If it still remains an accepted law, il should be enforced. Herein came the fest for the Sherman Antitrust law Evcl lyhody knows with what vigor the President has been enforcing old laws and securing new ones. While he has awakened fear in some quarters that ho is making war on capital his ener- getic action will be produetlJ, of good Possibly some "undigested laws" vii be get rid of. At any rats tho result will impress on the lawn Ikers the neod of greater care in providing aws that are in some agreement with in- dustrial growth and the newer indus. trial organisms necessary to do busi ness at all, at the same time watchfu of the public welfare, which is of vast ly greater importance than the affair! Of any particular combination.
 The action of the President in en. forcing laws, as he is sworn to do has stirred an inquiry into the req character of the antitrust law and { demand for its repeal. The idea, how ever. that this law is a trust smash ing measure falls short of its object To prevent such conduct on the par