Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1910-01-20

real and personal property only OF such
corporations to the same taxation as inn
posed by the states within which Il may
be situated upon other similar property
located therein, and IL should require
such corporations to file full and COM
plete reports OF their operations with the
department OF commerce and labor ut
regular intervals. Corporations organized
under this act should be prohibited from
acquiring and holding stock In other corr
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
III the prohibition OF the antitrust act
against combinations In restraint OF
trade Is to be effectively enforced. It In
essential that the national government
shall provide for the creation OF national
corporations to carry on legitimate
business throughout the United states
The conflicting laws OF the different
states OF the union with respect TO for-
eign corporations make II dificult, II not
impossible. for one corporation to comply
with their requirements so as to carry
| on business in 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 ~
should be said that the measure contem-
| plated does not repeal the sherman anti
| trust law and Is not to be framed SO an
| to permit the doing of the wrongs winch
| II IL the purpose OF that law TO prevent
| but only to foster continuance ana al
| vance OF the highest Industrial enciehey
4 "A. .N.laI nj hi
Sure to Meet Opposition.
Such national incorporation law VIII
be opposed. nrst. by those who believe
that trusts should be completely. broken
| up and their property destroyed. ~ VIII
| be opposed, second. by those who douot
| the constitutionallty OF such federal IN
| corporation and even II II Is valid, opJecs
| to Il as too great federal CONTAMINATION.
| II will be opposed third, by those wno
will Insist that mere voluntary my,
| poration like this will not attract 10 ta
| assistance the worst OF the onenuers
! against the antitrust statute and VINO
| will therefore propose Instead or IL sys'
tenn OF compulsory licenses Tor All Ieu'
eral corporations engaged Ia nterstats
business,
| Let us consider these objections In ther
order. The government IL now trying e
| dissolve some OF these combinations ane
Il il not the intention OF the government
to desist In the least degree In us eHor
to end these combinations which are 70
day monopolizing the commerce or tnu
country; that where II appears that tn'
acquisition and concentration OF property
go to the extent of creating monopol>
OF substantially and directly restraining
Interstate commerce. II Is not the inten
ton OF the government to permit thu
monopoly to exist under federal incor
poration or to transfer to the protecting
wing OF the federal government or
state corporation now violating the Sher
man act. But II is not, and should mo-
be, the policy OF the government TO pre-
vent reasonable concentration OF capita
which is necessary TO the economic devei
| 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 Z
compete with foreign manufacturers II
many markets. 1t should be the care o
the government TO permit such concen
tration OF capital while keeping open tn
avenues of individual enterprise, and tn
opportunity for man or corporation
with reasonable capital TO engage II
business III we would maintain on
present business supremacy. we shoul'
give to Industrial concerns an oppor
tunity to organize or to concentrate thei
legitimate capital In federal corpora
ton. and to carry on their large bushes
within the lines OF the law.
May Doubt ConstltutlonaIIty.
second-There are those who doubt tn
constitutionality OF such federal incorpor
alton The regulation of interstate an
foreign commerce Is certainly conferre
in the fullest measure upon congress-. an
IL for the purpose OF securing In the mos
thorough manner that kind of regulation
congress shall insist that II may proyid
and authorize agencies TO carry on tina
commerce. II would seem to be within II
power this has been distinctly afiirme
with respect to railroad companies doin
an Interstate business and interstat
bridges. The power OF Incorporation ha
been exercised by congress and uphel
by the supreme court In this regarc
| why, then, with respect to any oths
form of interstate commerce like the sal
of goods across state boundaries and Int
foreign countries. may the same powe
not be asserted? Indeed. II In tho YER
fact that they carry on Interstate com
merce that makes these great industria
concerns subject 10 federal prosecutio
and control. How far as incidental {
the carrying on OF that commerce IL ma
be within the power OF the federal gov
| eminent to authorize the manufacturer Q
| goods, liz perhaps more open to discus
sion, though a recent decision OF the su
preme court would seem to answer tina
question In the Affirmative.
Even those who are willing to conced
1 that the supreme court may sustain sue
federal Incorporation are inclined to OF
| pose II on the ground OF It's tendency /
the enlargement OF the federal power a
the expense OF the power OF the state
1t is 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 superyI
I eta fha 0th of -
| cations that are I'm fact federal becaus
| they are as wide as the country and ar
/ entirely unlimited in their business b
| state lines. Nor is the Capitalization O
federal power under this act likely TO b
| excessive. Only the largest corporation
would avail themselves OF such n law, be
! cause the burden of complete federal su
pervision and control that must certalnl
be imposed to accomplish the purpose o
| the incorporation would not be accepte
by an ordinary business concern. TIL
| third objection, that the worst offender
| will not accept federal Incorporation, 4
easily answered. The DEGREES OF lnjunc
| ton recently adopted In prosecutions un
| der the antitrust law are so thorough
and sweeping that the corporations az
fected ~ them have but three course
| before them:
First. they must resolve themselves
into their component parts I'm the differ
emit states, with n consequent loss {,
i themselves OF capital and effective organ
ization and to the country of concen
trated energy and enterprise; or second
in defiance OF the law and under som,
| secret trust they must attempt TO con
| tinue their business I'm violation OF tn,
| federal statute, and thus incur the pen.
| allies of contempt and bring on an in.
evitabie criminal prosecution OF the indi.
viduals named in the decree and thelI
associates. or
Third, they must reorganlze and accept
| in good faith the federal charter I sug.
gest federal compulsory license law,
urged as a substitute for n federal incor-
poratIon law, is unnecessary except to
reach that kind OF corporation which. by
| virtue Of the considerations already adj
| .,nnnnd will take advantage voluntarily