The Prescott daily news., 1910-01-10
able or can be introduced into the stat.

ute.
 Tn considering violations of the anti trust law we ought, of course. not to forget that that law makes unlawful, methods of carrying on business which before it's passage were regarded as evil dence of business sagacity and success. and that they were denounced in this act not because of their intrinsic immoral ity, but because of. the dangerous re- suits toward which they tended, the con centration of industrial power in the hands of the few, leading to oppres- sion and injustice. In dealing, therefore. with many of the men who have used the methods condemned by the statute for the purpose of maintaining profit able business, we may well facilitate a change by them in the method of do- ing business, and enable them to bring it back into the zone of lawfulness. without losing to the country the economy of management by which, in our domestic trade the cost of production has been materially lessened and in competition with foreign manufacturers our foreign trade has been greatly increased.
 Asks National Corporation Law by congress of a general law providing for the formation of corporations to en- gage in trade and commerce among the states and with foreign nations, protect ing them from undue interference by tue states and regulating their activities so as to prevent the recurrence under na- tional auspices, of those abuses which have arisen under state control. Such a law should provide for the issue of stock of such corporations to an amount equal only to the cash paid in on the stock and if the stock be issued for property then at fair valuation ascertained un- der approval and supervision of federal authority after a full and complete dis closure of all the facts pertaining to the value of such property and the interest therein of the persons to whom it is proposed to issue stock in payment of such property. It should subject the real and personal property only of such cor porations to the same taxation as i'm posed by the states within which it may be situated upon other similar property located therein, and 1t should require such corporations to file full and com plete reports of their operations with the regular intervals. Corporations organized under this act should be prohibited from acquiring and holding stock in other cor poratons (eXcept for special reasons upon approval by the proper federal author ity), 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.
 State Laws Conflict.
 "If the prohibition of the antitrust act against combinations in restraint of trade Is to he effectively enforced it is essen tial that the national government shall provide for the creation of national cor porations to carry on legitimate bnsi- ness throughout the United States. The conflicting laws of the different states of the union with respect to foreign corpora tions make it difficult. if not impossible. for one corporation to comply with their requirements so as to carry on business in number of different states
 ITO the suggestion that this proposal of federal incorporation for industrial com binatfons Is intended to furnish them q refuge in which to continue industrial business under federal protection It 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 1t 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.
 Such a national incorporation law win be opposed. first. by those who believe that trusts should be completely broken up and their property destroyed. It will be opposed. second. by those who doubt corporation and even If 1t is valid. object to it as too great federal centralization It will be opposed. third. by those who 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 1t a sys- tenn of compulsory licenses for all feder- al corporations engaged in interstate business.
 Let us consider these objections in their order. The government Is now try ing to dissolve some of these combina- tions and 1t Is not the intention of the government to UeSlSt Tn the least degree in its effort to end these combinations which are to-day monopolizisg the com merce of this country, that where 1t ap- pears that the acquisition and concen- tration of property go to the extent of creating monopoly of substantially and directly restraining interstate commerce, 1t is not the intention of the government to permit this monopoly to exist under federal incorporation or to transfer to the protecting wing of the federal gov ernmen of q state corporation now vio- n nnf Int to mt and should not be. the policy of the gov ernment to prevent reasonable concen- tration of capital which is necessary to the economic development of manufac- ture. trade and commerce.
 May Doubt ConstitutionaIity.
 'Second-There are those who doubt the constitutionality of such federal incorpor. ation. The regulation of interstate and foreign commerce is certainly conferred Tn 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 1t may provide and authorize agencies to carry on that commerce, 1t would seem to be within Its power, this has been distinctly affirmed with respect to railroad companies doing an interstate business and interstate 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 sak Of goods across state boundaries and into foreign countries may the same power not be asserted? Indeed. 1t 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 I the carrying on of that commerce it may be within the power of the federal gov. ernment to authorize the manufactures of goods. Is perhaps more open to discus sion, though recent decision of the su. preme court would seem to answer thai question In the affirmative
 The third objection that the worst or lenders will not accept federal incorpora-