Americus times-recorder. [volume] (Americus, Ga.) 1891-current, 1911-12-07
TAFT STILL YEARNS FOR FED
ERAL INCORPORATION ACT.


President Taft Tcsists the construc-
ton put upon the Supreme Court de-
cisions in the Standard Oil and To-
bacco cases, that they emasculateed
the Sherman act by writing into it the
word reasonable" in reference to To-
st~aint of trade. Bryan and a number
OF Democratic leaders 50 interpreted
these decison The President, on the
other hand, insists that this is not
true A he views it, by this judgment
OF the Supreme Court: "A reasonable
restraint of trade at common law S
well understood and is CLEARLY defined.
Ii does not rest in the discretion Of the
court. 1t must be limited to accomD-
lish the purpose Of a lawful main con-
tract to which, in order that it shall
be enforceable at all, it must be Incl
dental. If it exceeds the needs Of that
contract it is void"
/ he L ItSINtHA dloO ulCGC4AlS iO'h
the view that an underlined and unlim-
tied discretion has been awarded the
Federal courts of Diet ermining what is
reasonable restraint Of trade. As 10
this he says by its judgment every
contract and combination in restraint
of interstate trade made with the pur-
pOsa or necessary effect OF controlling
prices by sitting competition, or OF
establishment in whol2 or in part
monopoly of such trade, is condemned
by the statute. The most extreme
critics cannot instance case that
ought to be condemned under the
statute which is not brought within its
terms as thus con@tGrct.'
After reviewing . 1e2Cth the steps
taken to reorgani;.. lhc .wo great
trusts in question III conformity with
the Supreme Court decis GA, the Pres
ident refers to the movement for the
repeal of the Sherman Act. Along this
line he insists that the Supreme Court
has made it clear that there is moth
ing in the statute which condemns
combinations Of capital or mere big
ness of plants organized to secure
economy in production and reduction
of its cost. 1T is only when the pur-
foot nf tho
iZation and maintenance OF the COM
hination or the aggregation Of I'M
mense siZa are the sitting of compe-
tition, actual and potential, and the
of prices and establishing
a monopoly, that the statute is yio-
lated. Mere size is no sin against the
law. The merging of two or more
business plants necessarily eliminates
between the units thus
combined, but this elimination is in
contravention of the statute only
when the combination is made for
purpose of ending this particular
in order to secure control
of, and enhance prices and create
While many of the remedies sug-
gestad appear to the President as gilt
tering generalities, he sees no obJec-
ton to the enactment of a law which
shall describe and denounce methods
of competition which are unfair and
are badges of the unlawful purposes
denounced in the anti trust law. The
and purpose to suppress
competitor by underselling him at
price so improbable as to drive him
out of business, Or the making of eX-
elusive contracts with customers UNI
der which they are required to give
up association with other manufa2-
turers. and numerous kindred meth
DDS for sitting competition and effect
ing monopoly, should be described
with sufficient accuracy in a criminal
statute on the one hand to enable the
government to shorten its task by
prosecuting single misdemeanors in-
stead of an entire conspiracy, and, on
the other hand, to serve the purpose
of pointing out more in detail to the
business. community what must be
avoided"
Reiterating his former position as
to the ACCESSIBILITY of Federal incor-
poration as a means of supervising and
regulating great combinations of cap
ital. the President stresses this point
at length in his message. As he views
it: They should be subjected to rigid
rules as to their organization and pro-
cedure. including effective publicity
and to the closest supervision as to the
issue of stock and bonds by an eXec'I-
tive bureau or commission in the de-
partment of commerce and labor to
which in times of doubt they might
Well submit their proposed plans for
future business. 1t must be distinctly
understood that interpretations under
federal law could not exempt the
company thus formed and its incor-
porators and managers from prosecu-
ton under the antitrust law for sub
eequent illegal conduct, but the pub
licity of it's procedure and the oppor-
tunity for frequent consultation with
the bureau or commission in charge o.