Arizona republican., 1908-04-28

MORE POWER TO COMM SSICN.
 We are trying to avoid alike the evils which would flow from govern ment ownership of the public utilities by which interstate commerce is chief ly carried on. and the evils which flow from the riot and chaos of unrestrict- cd individualism. There is grave dan ger to our free institutions in the cor rupting influence exercised by great wealth suddenly concentrated in the hands of the few. We should in a sane manner try to remedy this dan ger. in spite of the sullen opposition of those men. and with the full pur- pose to protect them in all their rights at the very time that We require them to deal rightfully with others.
 When with steam and electricity modern business conditions went through the astounding revolution which in this country began over half century ago. there was at first much hesitation as to what particular gov ernmental agency should be used to grapple with the new conditions. At almost the same time. about twenty years since. the effort was made to control combinations by regulating them through interstate commerce commissions and to abolish them by means of the antitrust act. the two remedies therefore being in part lnu- tually incompatible. The interstate commerce law has produced admira- ble results especially since it was strengthened by the Hepburn law two years ago. The antitrust law, though it worked some good because anything is better than anarchy, and complete absence of regulation. nevertheless has proved in many respects not merely inadequate but mischievOus. Twenty years ago the misuse of corporate power had produced almost every con ceivable form of abuse and had worked the gravest injury to business morality and the public consciousness. For a long time federal regulation of inter-
 state commerce had been purely neg ative, the national judicial acting merely in isolated cases to restrain the state from exercising power which was clearly unconstitutional as well as unwise for them to exercise
 but which. nevertheless, the national government itself failed to exercise. Thus the corporations monopolizlng commerce made the law for them selves. state power and common law being inadequate to accomplish any effective legislation and the national power not yet having been put forth. The result was mischievous in the eX- treme and only shortsighted and utter failure to appreciate the grossness of the evils to which the lack of regula- tion gave rise can excuse the we'll meaning persons who now desire to abolish the antitrust law outright or to amend it by simply condemning unreasonable" combinations.
 Power should unquestionably be lodged somewhere in the executive branch of the government to permit combination which will further the public interest. but it must always be remembered that as regards the great wealthy combinations through which most of the interstate business of to- day is done. the burden of proof should be on them to show that they have a right to exist. No judicial tribunal has the knowledge or the experience tO determine in the first place whether a ' given combination is advisable CT nee essary in the interest of the public. Somebody. whether a commission or ! q bureau under the deDartment of