The Mena weekly star., 1910-01-13

order. The government is now ..s.-.. dissolve some of these combinations and fl is not the intention of the government to desist in the least degree in It's enort to end these combinations which are to- day monopolizing the commerce of this country; that where 1t appears that the acquisition and concentration of property go to the extent of creating a monopoly of substantially and directly restraining interstate commerce, 1t Is not the inten- ton of the government to permit this monopoly to exist under federal incor- poration or to transfer to the protecting wing of the federal government of a state corporation now violating the Sher. man act. But it is not, and should mol 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 ir 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 theif legitimate capital in a federal corpora tion. and to carry on their large business within the lines of the law.
 May Doubt constitutIonalIty.
 Second-There are those who doubt the constitutionality of such federal incorpor. ho of inf np 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 1t may provide and authorize agencies to carry on thai 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 rot 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 tc the carrying on of that commerce 1t may be within the power of the federal gov ernment to authorize the manufacturer of goods, Is perhaps more open to discus. sion. though a 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 suct federal incorporation are inclined to op- m, he rvro of lie +~ the enlargement of the federal power at the expense of the power of the state. It is a sufficient answer to this argument to say that no other method can be sug- gested which offers federal protection or the one hand and close federal supervi- sion on the other of these great organi- zations that are in fact federal because they are as wice as the country and are entirely unlimited in their business by state lines Nor Is the centraization 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 su- pervision and control that must certainly he 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 decrees of injunc- ton recently adopted in prosecutors un- der the antitrust law are so thorough and sweeping that the corporations af- 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 to themselves of capital and effective organ irat'on and to the country of concen- trated energy and enterprise: or second. In defiance of the law and under some secret trust they must attempt to con- tinue their business in violation of the federal statute. and thus incur the pen alties of contempt and bring on an in- evitable criminal prosecution of the indi- viduals named in the decree and their associates; or
 Third. they must reorgani1e and accent In good faith the federal charter I sug- gest a federal compulsory license law urged as substitute for a federal incor- poration law. is unnecessary except to reach that kind of corporation which. by virtue of the considerations already ad- vanced, will take advantage voluntarily of an incorporation law, while the other state corporations doing an interstate business do not need the supervision or the regulation of federal license and would only be unnecessarily hurdened thereby.
 The attorney general at my suggestion, has drafted a federal incorporation law. embodying the views I have attempted to set forth and It will be at the dispos,- ton of tie appropriate committees of congress-
 WILLIAM H. TAVT.
 The White House. Jan. ', 1910.