Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1910-01-12

department 81 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 monOpolies.
If the prohibition Of the antitrust act
against combinations in restraint of
trade is to be effectively enforced, it is
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 different
states of the union with respect to for
eign corporations make it difficult, II not
impossible, for one corporation to comply
with their requirements so as to carry
on business in a number of different
states.
To the suggestion that this proposal of
federal incorporation for industrial COM
binations is intended to furnish them
refuge in which to continue industrial
business under federal protection. 1t
should be said that the measure contem-
plated does not repeal the Sherman anti
trust law and is not to be framed so as
to permit the doing of the wrongs which
it is the purpose of that law to prevent,
but only to foster a continuance and ad-
vance of the highest industrial efficiency
without permitting Industrial abuses.
Sure to Meet Opposition.
Such a national Incorporation law will
be opposed, first, by those who believe
that trusts should be completely broken
up and their property destroyed. 1t will
be opposed, second, by those who doubt
the constitutionality of such federal in
corporation and even if it is valid, object
to it as too great federal naturalization.
It will be opposed, third, by those VINO
will insist that mere voluntary incor-
poration like this will not attract to its
assistance the worst of the Offenders
against the antitrust statute and who
will therefore propose instead of it a sys-
tenn of compulsory licenses for all ted
eral corporations engaged in interstate
business.
Let us consider these objections in their
order The government is now trying 10
dissolve some of these combinations ana
it is not the intention of the government
to desst in the least degree in its effort
to end these combinations which are to-
day monopolizing the commerce of this
ACQUISITION and concentration of property
go to the extent of creating a monopoly
of substantially and directly restraining
interstate commerce. it is not the 1nten-
ton of the government to permit this
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 it is not, and should not
| be- the policy Of the government to pre-
| vent reasonable concentration OF capital
| which is necessary to the economic devel-
! opment of manufacture, trade and 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 in
| many markets. It 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 corporation
with reasonable capital to engage in
business If we would maintain our
present business supremacy, we should
| give to industrial concerns an oppor-
| tunity to organize or to concentrate their
! 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 and
foreign commerce is certainly conferred
| in the fullest measure upon congress, and
| if for the purpose of securing in the most
| thorough manner that kind of regulation,
| congress shall insist that it may provide
and authorize agencies to carry on that
commerce, it would seem to be within its
power, this has been distinctly affirmed
with respect to railroad companies doing
an Interstate business and interstate
bridges. The power of incorporation has
been exercised by congress and upheld
by the supreme court in this regard.
Why, then, with respect to any other
form of interstate commerce like the sale
Of goods across state boundaries and into
foreign countries, may the same power
not be asserted? Indeed, it is the very
fact that they carry on interstate COM
merce that makes these great industrial
concerns subject to federal prosecution
and control. How far as incidental to
the carrying on Of that commerce it may
be within the power of the federal gov
eminent to authorize the manufacturer Of
goods, is perhaps more open til discus.
sion, though recent decision of the su.
preme court would seem to answer that
question in the affirmative.
Even those who are willing to concede
that the supreme court may sustain such
federal incorporation are inclined to op.
pose it on the ground of it's tendency tt
the enlargement of the federal power al
the expense of the power of the state
It is sufficient answer to this argument
to say that 10 other method can be sus.
gested which offers federal protection or
the one hand and close federal supervi
sion on the other Of these great organi.
cations that are in fact federal because
| they are as wide as the country and are
entirely unlimited in their business by
state lines. Nor is the Capitalization OF
federal power under this act likely to be
excessive. Only the largest corporations
would avail themselves of such law, be.
cause the burden of complete federal SUI.
| pervision and control that must certainly
| be imposed to accomplish the purpose OF
the incorporation would not be accepted
by an ordinary business concern. The
third objection, that the worst offenders
will not accept federal Incorporation, is
easily answered. The DEGREES of iniunc.
ton recently adopted in prosecutions un.
der the antitrust law are so thorough
and sweeping that the corporations az
fected by them have but three courses
before them:
First, they must resolve themselves
into their component parts in the differ
ent states, with consequent loss ia
themselves of capital and effective organ
ization and to the country of concen-
trated energy and enterprise; or second,