The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1911-09-29

unreasonable advances IN rates were
made. The Interstate Commerce
Commission might ind the advance
Unreasonable only after "A long hear
ins. and after u had gone into effect.
and after the unreasonable rates had
been collected for "A considerable Der
Tod I suggested that the Interstate
commerce Commission might have
power TO suspend such an order for
90 days and look into It's reasonable
ness. and that II II be found unreal
sonable IL should not be permitted
] invited attention also to the COM
paint OF the shippers that they did
not have the power to direct the
route over which their shipment
should pass to destination. I recon-
mended that this be given them. sub
Ject to such reasonable regulation as
the commission might prescribe
All these provisions In one form OF
another were enacted into the law
j think IL Is now generally con-
coded by those who understand the
operation Of the present law that the
regulatiNe power OF the Interstate
commerce Commission IL sufficiently
great to remedy generally the injus-
Tee To shippers which gave rise to the
demand for legislation Except the
Introduction Of Limitation as TO the
power OF issuing stocks and bonds I
do not think It wise to add 10 the
present statutes
All reforms have not been secured
IN railroad management. That takes
time. Many rates are still unreason-
able or discriminating, but the point
| am making is that We now have
effective and impartial machinery in
the present organization and power OF
the compassion for effecting those re-
forms without additional restrictive
legislation.
Anti Trust Decisions.
Second. With respect To the trusts
I have elsewhere given my View OF
what the decision Of the Supreme
court is. II in effect declares that
the antitrust statute Furnishes every
combination or restraint OF Interstate
trade that il intended and has the
necessary effect To control prices. ex-
J clude competition and establish a
partial or complete monopoly of any
Interstate trade in any merchandise.
and that n bill Of equity may be filed
against the offending combination or
corporation which will lead To- dis
Indignation Of that combination. IL
/ found unlawful. and a division of IL
| into a sufficient number Of parts un-
! der separate ownership to insure
/ competition and to maintain 10 10y
I the continuing force of perpetual in
| junction against the resumption Of
the unlawful bond and purpose of the
] combincrs. Whether II will he pos
/ ton act Tor the closer supervision 81
/ thos" corporations engaged in inter-
I state trade. and for their greater Sc
! curitN when they pursue business in
! accordance with law. am unable to
/ say, hecaus" the constitutional views
/ OF the present majority in tn. lower
| house ar" presumably against the in
crease Of the federal function with
/ respect tu corporations he that as
! ~ may. N" business community now
| knows. "r ought to know. where IL
/ stands. The court declines To- hold
l that competition l. impossible under
/ modern business conditions. hut n in
| sists that 10 must be- given fun on
| poriunity for operation. and that any
/ combined effort affecting infarstata
! TRAD" looking 20 its suppression Is
I contrary 2" law In other words.
\ business must face tho necessity q.
I throwing away tho crutCh ~ comhin-
/ alton against competition in tts
/ further progress When this rule is
/ recognized. when the corporations
mat have offended the law are are
disintcErated sufficiently to enable
."rnpe'ition to hav" fun play. then
/ there Is no reason why business
| should not 20 on unhampered. The
federal regulation ~ prices is impos-
! SIM" In our country Of products Of
criticism has heen uttered in no
I IN" Department Of Justice I'm the in
stttution NJ prosecutions and bills Of
equity under the antitrust law. on
the ground that q Is hurting business.
u Is III" sworn duty ~ tho executive
. 20 enforce IN" law. and rs long as
~N' combinations exist and are
known Co exist 10 the law officers 81
tho government in any way. they
would he lacking In their duty IL they
did not prosecute them
The Tariff Law.
Third. With respect TO tariff laws
IN" business ~ tho country to-day
rests upon tho protective tariff basis
FNcry"n" knows lhis. and everyone
must boz aware that a change Of tar
ms in such a way that those bust
Z n'ss"s that are dependent upon pro-
lection for their existence shall lose
u must injur" present conditions In
an business. whether dependent on
/ ~" tarin or not. The change. there
. fore. from a protective tarif 10 a
tarim for revenue only IS necessarily
hnsti" 20 existing business. and must
lead 10 business depression and at
least temporary business disaster.
But there are many. and I am among
those. who believe that protection In
10" past has been too high. and that
u is possible o. lower tho tariff 30 "a
not ." interfere with business. give.
"a living rate ~ protection 20 existing
enterprise and get prevent excessive
prices growing out - excessive rates
In carrying out such r. policy and
maintaining such an attitude. r. lie
essential that tho interests ~ bust
ness should he guarded by close in
frsflga'iOn into their needs ~ 10 a
protective fariW. and fhfa .rr r.Hygfy..