The new era., 1910-01-20

If the prohibition OF the antitrust act
against combinations in restraint OF
trade is to be effectively enforced, II IL
essential that the national government
shall provide for the creation OF national
corporations to carry on IA Legitimate
business throughout the United states.
The conflicting laws of the dinerent
states OF the union with respect to for
eisn corporations make 1t difficult. IT noS
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
blnations 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 A.
to permit the doing of the wrongs which
1t is the purpose OF that law to prevent
but only to foster continuance ana ad-
vance of the highest industrial efficiency
without permitting industrial abuses
Sure to Meet Opposition.
Such national incorporation law viii
be opposed first, by those who believe
that trusts should be completely broken
up and their property destroyed II WIN
be opposed. second. by those VINO doups
the constitutionalty of such federal IN
to it as too great federal centraiizapoh'
1t will be opposed. third, by those wha
will insist that mere voluntary moor
poration like this will not attract TO It's
assistance the worst of the onehaera
against the antitrust statute and wha
will therefore propose instead OF IL sys-
TEN Of compulsory licenses for all ieo-
eral corporations engaged in Interstate
business.
Let us consider these objections In theii
mt iS
dissolve some of these combinations and
1t is not the intention of the government
to desst in the least degree in lis ehor'
to end these combinations which are To-
day monopolizing the commerce or TINS
country: that where 1t appears thht tns
ACQUISITION and concentration OF property
| go to the extent of creating monopoly
| of substantially and directly RESTRAINING
| interstate commerce. 1t Is not the lhteh-
| 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 1t 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 ana 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. 1t 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. II we would maintain oui
| present business supremacy. we shonle
| give to Industrial concerns an oppor-
| tunity to organize or to concentrate theii
| legitimate capital in federal corpora
| ton and to carry on their large business
| within the lines of the law.
May Doubt ConsttutionaIity.
| Second-There 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. 1t would seem to be within itl
power, this has been distinctly affirmed
with respect to railroad companies doinl
an interstate business and interstate
bridges. The power of Incorporation hRi
been exercised by congress and upheld
by the supreme court in this regard
Why, then, with respect to any othei
form of interstate commerce like the sals
of goods across state boundaries and inta
foreign countries may the powei
not be asserted? Indeed. 1t is the very
fact that they carry interstate
merce that makes these great industrial
concerns subject to federal prosecution
and control. How far as incidental to
the carrying on of that commerce il may
be within the power of the federal gov.
ernment to authorize the manufacturer Of
goods. is perhaps more open to discus.
sion. though recent decision of the SUI.
preme court would seem to answer thai
question in the affirmative.
that the supreme court may sustain such
federal incorporation inclined to op-
pose 1t the ground of its tendency Il
the enlargement of the federal power al
the expense of the power of the state
1t is sufficient answer to this argument
to say that no other method can be SUE.
gested which offers federal protection OF
the one hand and close federal supervi-
sion on the other of these great oreani.
cations that are In fact federal because
they wide the country and arr
entirely unlimited in their business by
state lines. Nor is the Capitalization OF
federal power under this act likely to bs
excessive. Only the largest corporations
would avail themselves of such a law be.
cause the burden of complete federal sr.
pervision and control that must certainly
be imposed to accomplish the purpose OF
the incorporation would not be accepted
by ordinary business concern. The
third objection. that the worst offender
will not accept federal Incorporation Ia
easily answered. The DEGREES of injunc.
ton recently adopted in prosecutions un.
der the antitrust law are so thorough
and sweeping that the corporations af.
fected ~ 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.
izaton and to the country Of concen.
in defiance of the law and under some
secret trust they must attempt to con.
tinue their business in violation OF ths
federal statute, and thus incur the pen.
alties of contempt and bring on an in.
evitable criminal prosecution of the indi.
yiduals named in the decree and theIs