The Greenville journal. [volume] (Greenville, Ohio) 1850-1918, 1910-01-13

such corporations 20 hIe full and COM |
plete reports OF their operations with the |
department OF commerce and labor at |
regular intervals. Corporations organized |
under this act should be prohibited from |
acquiring and holding stock In other cor
porations Except for special reasons upon |
approval by the proper federal author
ity). thus avoiding the creation, under |
national auspices. OF the holding COM
pany with subordinate corporations In
different states which has been such an
effective agency in the creation OF the
great trusts and monopolles.
II the prohibition OF the antitrust act
against combinations in restraint OF
trade is to be effectively enforced It 10
essential that the national government
shall provide for the creation OF national
corporations to carry on a legitimate
business throughout the United States.
The conflicting laws OF the dinerent
states OF the union with respect TO tor-
eign corporations make II dincult' II not
impossible. for one corporation TO comply
with their requirements SO as to carry
on business in a number OF dinereht
states.
To the suggestion that this proposal OF
federal incorporation for industrial COM
refuge in which to continue industrlai
business under federal protection. II
should Oe said that the measure contem-
plated does not repeal the sherman anu
trust law and is not to be framed go as
to permit the doing Of the wrongs Wnlch
it is the purpose OF that law to prevent
but only to foster a continuance ana ad-
vance OF the highest industrial etnclehCy
without permitting Industrial abuses.
Sure to Meet Opposition.
Such a national Incorporation law will
be opposed, first. by those who beheSe
that trusts should be completely broken
up and their property destroyed: IL wiz
be opposed second, by those VINO uouoI
the constitutionality OF such federal IN
corporation and even IL 1t is valid ooJect
to 1t as too great federal centrallzatloh.
It will be opposed, third, by those VINO
will insist that a mere voluntary incor-
noration like this will not attract 10 lts
assistance the worst of the otenuers
against the antitrust statute ana VINO
will therefore propose instead OF II sys-
tenn of compulsory licenses for all Ieu-
eral corporations engaged IN Interstate
business.
Let us consider these objections IN thelr
order. The government is now Trying W
dIssoIve some of these combinations ana
| IN desist in the least degree In its enort
| tn end these combinations which are To-
| day monopolizing the commerce OF TINS
| country; that where 1t appears mat Ile
| ACQUISITION and concentration OF properly
! go to the extent of creating mohopoiS
| of substantially and directly restraining
| Interstate commerce, 1t is not the inten-
| ton of the government to permit thlS
| monopoly to exist under federal lncor-
poration or to transfer to the protecting
| wing Of the federal government OF
| state CORPORATION now violating the Sher-
| man act But 1t Is not, and shoulu not
be, the policy of the government TO pre-
| vent reasonable concentration OF capta'
which is necessary to the economic deVel-
| opment of manufacture trade ana COM
| merce, This country has shown power
| of economic production that has aston
| ished the world and has enabled US to
| compete with foreign manufacturers 1T
| many markets. 1t should be the care OF
the government to permit such concen'
tration of capital while keeping open the
avenues of individual enterprise, and the
opportunity for man or corporanoF
with reasonable capital to engage ir
business. If we would maintain oul
present business supremacy, we shoulc
give to industrial concerns an oppor'
tunity to organize or to concentrate theli
legitimate capital in a federal corpora
ton and to carry on their large business
within the lines Of the law.
May Doubt constitutionaIity.
Second-There are those who doubt the
| constitutionality of such federal incorpor'
alton. The regulation OF Interstate anc
| foreign commerce is certainly conferred
in the fullest measure upon congress, ant
| If for the purpose of securing in the mos
thorough manner that kind of regulation
congress shall insist that 1t may provide
and authorize agencies to carry on tina
commerce, 1t would seem to be within 1t:
power, this has been distinctly affirmed
with respect to railroad companies dolnt
an interstate business and interstate
bridges. The power of incorporation ha!
been exercised by congress and upheld
by the supreme court in this regard
Why, then. with respect to any othe
| form of interstate commerce like the sal,
| of goods across state boundaries and int
foreign countries, may the same powe
not be asserted? Indeed, 1t is the yer!
fact that they carry on interstate com
merce that makes these great industria
concerns subject to federal prosecution
and control. How far as incidental t
the carrying on Of that commerce 1t ma,
be within the power of the federal gov
ernment to authorize the manufacturer o
goods, is perhaps more open to discus
sion, though a recent decision of the su
preme court would seem to answer tha
question in the affirmative.
Even those who are willing to conced
that the supreme court may sustain sue
federal incorporation are inclined to op
pose it on the ground Of its tendency t
the enlargement of the federal power a
the expense of the power of the state
1t is a sufficient answer to this argumen
to say that no other method can be suG
gested which offers federal protection o
the one hand and close federal supervi
sion on the other Of these great organi
cations that are in fact federal becaus
they are as wide as the country and ar
entirely unlimited in their business b
} state lines. Nor is the Capitalization c
federal power under this act likely to b
would avail themselves of such law, bt
} cause the burden of complete federal ST
pervision and control that must Certainl
| be imposed to accomplish the purpose
: | the incorporation would not be aCcepte
by an ordinary business concern. TT
: third objection, that the worst offender
? | will not accept federal Incorporation,
; easily answered. The DEGREES of injunt
l ton recently adopted in prosecutions Ill
! der the antitrust law are so thoroug
! and sweeping that the corporations a
fected Ty them have but three course
= before them:
t First they must resolve themselvt
Q into their component parts in the diffe
' ent states, with a consequent loss
9 themselves of capital and effective organ
= ization and to the country of concel
|. trated energy and enterprise; or secon
! in defiance of the law and under SON
secret trust they must attempt to COZ
tinue their business in violation of II