The Glenwood post., 1910-01-15
able or can be introduced into the st.s-

trust law We ought, Of course. not to
| forget that that law makes unlawful.
before its passage were regarded as evil
| dence of business sagacity and success.
and that they we're sr inirnsc IN immors
| ity, but because of the dangerous re-
suits toward which they tended. the con
hands Of the few, leading to oppres-
| sion and injustice. In dealing, therefore,
mehods OF ahs SH the
| for the purpose of maintaining pront-
able business, We may well faciitate
ing business. and enable them to bring It
| back into the zone of lawfulness. without
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.
"I therefore recommend the enactment
| by congress of general law providing
for the formation of corporations to en- en-.
| ing them from undue Interference by the
states and regulating their activities SO
| as to prevent the recurrence. under ma
| tional auspices, of those abuses which
have arisen under state control. Such
| of such corporationas to an amount equal
| only to the cash paid in on the stock;
| then at a fair valuation ascertained un-
| der approval and supervision of federal
| authority after. full and complete dis
I value of such property and the interest
| therein of the persons to whom it is
to ssns II soa snbeei m se rea
and personal property only of such cor
| porations to the same taxation as i'm
| be situated upon other similar property
located therein. and It should require
| ,1ate of
| department of commerce and labor at
regular intervals. Corporations organized
| acquiring and holding stock In other cor
| porations except for special reasons upon
approval by the proper federal author
| 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.
III the prohibition of the antitrust act
against combinations in restraint of trade
| is to be effectively enforced, it is essen
| tial that the national government shall
provide for the creation of national cor
ness throughout the United States. The
| conflicting laws of the different states of
no maks with # to f1fsfn 1ot
for one corporation to comply with their
requirements so as to carry. on business
in number of different states.
| federal incorporation for Industrial COM
n is wheh o TO
business under federal protection. 1t
should be said that the measure contem
trust law and is not to be framed SO as
to permit the doing of the wrongs which
is ons the ose Of to
vance of the highest industrial efficiency
without permitting industrial abuses.
such national incorporation law will
| hn nynyn ncnI frEf hv ho hall
that trusts should be completely broken
up and their property destroyed: 1t will
the tn 'cn eanstitutonality % Of such. such federal ain in
| corporation and even if it is valid, object
| to it too great federal Capitalization.
1t will be opposed, third by those who
will insist that a mere voluntary incor-
poration like this will not attract to its
assistance the worst Of the offenders
| will therefore propose instead of it a sys-
tenn of compulsory licenses for all feder-
business.
Let US consider these objections in
ing to dissolve some of these combina-
| tions and it is not the intention of the
government to desist in the least degree
| which are to-day monopolizng the com
merce of this country; that where it ap-
tration Of property 70 to the ~ extent of
| creating monopoly of substantially and
| directly restraining interstate commerce.
| to permit this monopoly to exist under
federal incorporation or to transfer to
ernmen of a, state corporation now vio-
! lating the Sherman act. But 1t is not,
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-
alton. The regulation of interstate and
foreign commerce is certainly conferred
IN the fullest measure upon congress, and
| II 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
bridges. The power of Incorporation has
been exercised by congress and upheld
by BY the supreme court in this regard.
form of interstate commerce like the sale
Of goods across state boundaries and Into
not be asserted? Indeed it is the very
fact that they carry on interstate COM
meree that makes these great Industrial
and control. How far incidental to
the CARRYING on OF that commerce it may
ernment to authorize the manufacturer of
goods, is perhaps more open to discus
SION, tnougn recent decision of the su-
preme court would seem to answer that
question in the affirmative.
"The third objection, that the worst Of
tenders will not accept federal incorpora-
ton, is easily answered The DEGREES Of
Injunction recently adopted in prosecu-
tons under the antitrust law are so
thorough and sweeping that the corpora
tions affected 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
ization 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
federal statute, and thus incur the pen
alties of contempt and bring on an in
evitable criminal prosecution of the indi-
v1duals named in the decree and their as
sociates: or
Third, they must reorganize and ac-
cept IN good faith the federal charter