Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-07-28

to make up for the risk Of loss both
of capital and interest in the original
outlay. These considerations will have
justified t4e conlmny IN imposing
charges high enough to secure fair
income on the enterprise as whole.
The securities at market prices Will
have passed into the hands of subse-
uuent purchasers from the original In
vestors. Such circumstances should
properly affect the decision of the tri-
bunal engaged In determining whether
the totality Of rates charged Is reason
able or excessive. To ignore them
might so seriously and unjustly I'm
pair settled values as to destroy all
hope of restoring confidence and for
ever end the inducenent for invest
ment in new railroad construction
which. In returning prosperous times,
is sure to be essential to our material
progress.
From what has been said. the proper
conclusions would seem to be that In
attempting to determine whether the
entire schedule Of rates of railway Is
excessive the physical valuation Of the
road is relevant and important but
not necessarily controlling factor.
I am confident TINT the fixing of
rates on the principles suggested above
would not materially impair the pres
ent market values Of railroad securi-
ties In most cases. for l believe that
the normal increase in the value OF
railroad properties, especially in their
terminals, will more than make up for
the possible overcapitalization in ear
lier years. In some cases, doubtless,
1t will be found that overcapitalization
Is made an excuse for excessive rates,
and then they should be reduced; but
the consensus Of opinion seems to be
that the railroad rates generally In this
country are reasonably low.
Conclusion That There Should Be
Physical Valuation.
I have discussed this. with some de-
gree Of detail. merely to point out that
the valuation by the Interstate Com
merce Commission Of the tangible
property of railroad Is proper and
may from time to time be necessary IN
settling certain issues which may come
before them. and that no evil or injus-
tice can come from valuation in such
cases, II 1t be understood that the re
suit is to be used for just purpose,
and the right to fair profit under all
the circumstances Of the investment Is
recognized.
National Control Of Interstate Com
neree Corporation.
Another suggestion in respect to sub
ordinate and ancillary machinery nee
essary to carry out Republican policies
is that Of the incorporation under Ma
tional law or the licensing by National
license or enforced registry of compa-
MES engaged in interstate trade. The
fact is that nearly all corporations do
ing a commercial business are engaged
in interstate commerce, and If they all
were required to take out Federal
license or Federal charter, the bur-
den upon the interstate business OF the
country would become into2erable.
1t is necessary, therefore, to devise
some means for classifying and insur-
ing Federal supervision Of such cor
porations as have the power and temp
tation to effect restraints Of interstate
trade and monopolies. Such corpora
lions constitute very small percent.
age Of all engaged in interstate bust.
ness.
Construction Of Anti Trust Law.
The possible operation Of the anti
trust law under existing rulings OF the
Supreme Court has given rise to sug-
gestions for its necessary amendment
to prevent its application to cases
which 1t Is believed were never in the
contemplation of the trainers Of the
statute. Take two instances: A ner-
chant or manufacturer engaged In o
legitimate business that covers certain
States, wishes to sell his business and
his good will, and so in the terms OF
the sale obligates himself to the pur-
chaser not. to go into the same bust
ness in those States. Such restraint
of trade has always been enforced at
common law. Again, the employees OF
an interstate railway combine and en-
ter upon peaceable and lawful strike
to secure better wages. At common
law this was not restraint of trade
or commerce u violation of the
rights of the company or Of the public,
Neither case ought to be made a viola
ton of the antitrust law. My own
impression is that the Supreme Court
would hold that neither Of these In
stances is within its inhibition, but, IT
they are to be so regarded, general leg
islation amending the law is necessary
The proposal to compel every cor
poration to sell its commodities at the
same price the country over, allowing
for transportation, is utterly imprac-
ticable. If 1t can be shown that In or
der to drive out competition, a corpo-
ration owning large part Of the plant
producing an article is selling in one
part of the country, where 1t has com
petitors. at a low and improbable
price, and in another part of the coun-
try, where 1t hay nena-at an e1orbi-
tant price, this is eyldepce that It is at