The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-04-28

COLuplSte absence OF T0SuldtlOus
nevertheless has proved in many re-
spects not merely inadequate but
mischevous. Twenty years ago the
misuse OF corporate power had pro-
duced almost every conceivable form
of abuse, and had worked the gravest
injury to business morality and the
public conscience. For a long time
federal regulation Of interstate COM
mence had been purely negative, the
national judiciary merely acting in
Isolated cases to restrain the state
from exercising a power which it was
clearly unconstitutional as well as un-
wise for them to exercise, but which
nevertheless the national government
itself failed to exercise. Thus the
corporations monopolizing commerce
made the law for themselves, state
power and common law being in
regulation, and the national power
not yet having been put forth. The
result was mischievous in the ex-
IRENE, and only shortsighted and ut
ter failure to appreciate the grossness
of the evils to which the lack of
regulation gave rise, can excuse the
Well-meaning persons who now de-
sire to abolish the antitrust law out
right, or to amend it by simply con-
demntng unreasonable combina-
tons.
Where Power Should Be.
Power should unquestionably be
lodged somewhere in the executive
branch Of the government to permit
combinations which will further the
public interest; but it must always be
remembered that. as regards the great
and wealthy combinations through
which most Of the interstate business
OF today is done, the burden of proof
should be on them to show that they
have right to exist. No judicial tri-
hoo fbA II
perience to determine in the first place
whether a given com animation is advis-
able or necessary in the interest of
the public. Some body, whether a
commission, or a bureau under the de-
partment of commerce and labor,
should be given this power. Ny per-
sonal belief Is that ultimately we shall
have to adopt national Incorporation
law, though I am well aware that this
may be impossible at present. Over the
actions of the executive body in which
the power is placed the courts should
possess merely a power of review anal
ogous to that obtaining in connection
with the work of the interstate COM
merce commission at present. To
confer this power would not be a
leap in the dark; it would merely be
to carry still further the theory of
effect1ve governmental control of cor
porations which was responsible for
merce commission and for the en-
largement of its powers, and for the
creation of the bureau of corpora
tons. The interstate commerce leg
islatton has worked admirably. It
has benefited the public; it has bene-
conducted railroads; and in spite of
the fact that the business of the
country has enormously increased,
the value of this federal legislation
has been shown by the way in
which it has enabled the federal gov
eminent to correct the most pronounc-
edof the great varied abuses which
existed in the business world 20 years
ago-while the many abuses that still
emphasize the need Of furth-
er and more thoroughgoing legisla-
ton. Similarly, the bureau of cor
porations has amply justified it's crea-
ton. In other words, it is clear that
the principles employed to remedy
the great evils in the business world
have worked well, and they can now
be employed to correct the evils that
further commercial growth has
brought more prominently to the sur
face. The powers and scope Of the
interstate commerce commission,
and of any similar body, such as the
bureau of corporations, which has to
deal with the matter in hand, should
be greatly enlarged so as to meet the
requirements of the present day.
The decisions Of the supreme
Carolina cases illustrate how impos-
sible is a dual control Of national
commerce. The states can not con-
troll it. All they can do Is to control
intrastate commerce, and this now
forms but a small fraction of the
commerce carried by the railroads
each state. Actual exper-
oh he nFf ort az
state control is sure to be nullified
in one way or another sooner or lat
err. The nation alone can act with eff
fectiveness and wisdom; 1t should
have the control both of the business
and of the agent by which the bust
arate this control must result in gro
tesque absurdity. This means that
we must rely upon national legisla-
ton to prevent the commercial
abuses that now exist and the others
that are sure to arise unless some eff
f1cient governmental body has ade-
Quate power of control over them. At
present the failure of the congress to
utilize and exercise the great powers
conferred upon 1t as regards inter-
state commerce leaves this commerce
to be regulated, not by the state nor
yet by the congress. but by the oc-
casional and necessarily inadequate
judiciary. However upright and able
a court is, it can not act construc-
lively; it can only act negatively or
destructively, as an agency Of gov
eminent; and this means that the
courts are and must always be unable
to deal effectively with problem
like the present, which requires con-
structive action. A court can decide
what is faulty, but it has no power
to make better what it thus finds to
be faulty. There should be an eff
Gent executive body created with
power enough to correct abuses and
scope enough to work out the COM
pick problems that this great country
has developed. 1t is not sufficient OBJ
lection to say that such a body may
be guilty Of unwisdom or of abuses.
Any governmental body, whether a
court or a commission, whether exc
cutive, legislative or judicial, If given
power enough to enable 1t to do eff