The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-01-07

law should provide for the issue of
stock of such corporations to an
amount equal only to the cash paid
in ON this stock; and if the stock be
issued for property, then at a fair
valuation, ascertained under approx
al and supervision of federal author
ity, after a full and complete disclos-
ure of all the facts pertaining to the
value of such property and the inter-
est therein of the persons to whom
it is proposed to issue stock in pay
ment of such property. 1t should sub |
ject the real and personal property
only Of such corporations to the same
taxation as is imposed by the states
wherein it may be situated upon other
similar properly located therein, and
to file full and complete reports of
their operations with the department
of commerce and labor at regular in |
tervals.
Important Prohibition.
Corporations organized. under this |
act should be prohibited from &C
quiring and holding stock in other
corporations Except for special rea-
sons upon approval by the proper fed
eral authoriIies), thus avoiding the
creation under national auspices OF the
holding company with subordinate
corporations in different states, which
has been such an effective agency In
the creation of the great trusts and
mOnopolieS.
act against combinations in restraint
of trade is to be effectively enforced,
it is essential that the national gov
eminent shall provide for the crea-
ION a legitimate business throughout
the United States. The conflicting
laws of the different states OF the
union with respect to foreign corpor-
ations make it difficult, II not I'M
possible. for one corporation ito com
ply with their requirements so as to
carry on business in a number OF dill
ferent states. Il
To the suggestion that this proposal
of federal Incorporation for INDUSTRIAL
corporations is intended to furnish
them a refuge in which to continue
Industrial abuses under federal pro-
lection, it should be said that tine
measure contemplated does not -repeal
the Sherman antitrust law and is
not to be framed so as to permit the
doing of the wrongs which it is the
purpose of the law to prevent, but on
ly to foster a continuance ana 40
vance of the highest industrial eff
ficiency without permitting indus
trial abuses. 80 s.N@f
Those Who VIII Oppose.e :
| Such national Incorporation law
| will be opposed, first. by those who
believe that trusts should be com
destroyed. It will be opposed, sec
ond.. by those who doubt the constitu-
tionality of such federal incorporation,
and even If it is valid, object to It's
too great federal centrailzation. ~
will insist that a mere voluntary IN
CORPORATION like this will not attract
to its acceptance the worst OF the Of
tenders against the antitrust soatute
land who will therefore propose in
stead of it a system of compulsory IL
censes for all federal corporations en-
gagged in interstate business.
/ Let us consider the objections in
| their order The government is now
| trying to dissolve some of these COM
binations and it is not the intention
of the government to desist in the least
! degree in its efforts to end those COM
birations which are today mon0po-
lIizinp the commerce of the country;
| that where 1t appears that the ac-
| QUESTION and concentration OF property
go to the extent OF creating mo-
nopoiy or of substantially ana olrecl-
" restraining interstate commerce, it
lis not the intention of the government
| to permit this monopoly to exist un-
| der federal Incorporation or to trans
/ fer to. the protecting wing of the fed
4 'era1 government of the state corpora
ltion now violating the Sherman act
j But it is not, and should not be, the
/ policy of the government to prevent
4 reasonable concentration of capital
! which is necessary to the economic de-
| velopment Of manufacture, trade and
commerce. This country shows pow
err of economic production that has
| astonished the world and has enabled
US to compete with foreign manufac-
turers in many markets. 1t should be
1.-THE care of the government to per-
NIT such concentration of capital
while keeping open the avenue of in
dividual enterprise and the opportun-
ity for a man or corporation with reaS-
enable capital to engage in business
If we would maintain our present bus
ines supremacy, we should give to in
dustrial concerns an opportunity to
reorganize and to concentrate their
legitimate capital in federal corpor-
alton and to carry on their large bus
mess within the lines of the law.
!. Second Objection.
! Second, there are those who doubt
the constitutiona1ity of such federal in
corporation. The regulation of inter-
Estate and foreign commerce is certain
ly conferred in the fullest measure
upon congress, and If for the purpose
of securing in the most thorough man
. ner that kind Of regulation, congress
shall insist that it may provide and
authorize certain agencies to carry on
that commerce, it would seem to be
within its power. This has been dis
tinctly affirmed with respect to rail-
road companies doing an interstate
business and interstate bridges. The
power of incorporation has been ex-
. ercised 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 the state boundaries
and into foreign commerce, may the
same power not be asserted? Indeed,
it is the very fact that they carry on
! interstate commerce that makes these
j great Industrial concerns subject to
federal prosecution and control.
Il How far as incidental to the carry
| ing on of that commerce it may be
within the power of the federal gov
eminent to authorize the manufac-
ture of goods, is open to discussion,
though a recent decision of the SUI
: preme court would seem to answer