The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-07-19
prices of commodities the subject OF
interstate commerce.
ReouIation of Prices.


regulat ton of rates of transportation |
but the suggestion that prices OF com |
modities be regulated by congress seems
novel and radical
Yet the principle on whlch tue eeel aee
ulation of transportation rates IS basee
is simply that when property is useo
in a manner to make it of pubhc con-
sequence and affect the community a.
large, it becomes clothed with a puplle
use, and may be controlled oy lhe pu0
lie for the common good e
I'm the early days in some parts OF
this country statutes were enacted 70
regulate the business OF mlilefs' a1N
the rates they might charge 1or sIlho
ing. At that time it was a mater eesl.-O,. u
public concern that every farmer
should have the right TO have MS corn
ground at a reasonable rate
so today the conduct of the great
commerce on staple articles ahhons
the states is becoming a matter OIL
public consequence, and the courts
have upheld legislation regulating 1t
and prescribing some of the conditions
under which it may be carried on. 10
require as one of these conditions tnat
prices for commodities dealt IN III N
terstate commerce must be reasonable
only involves a new application oL the
same principle.
.srrhe antitrust legislation of the
United States and most of the separate
states is based on the theory that tne
natural price of an article IS that llAeu
by the operation of the natural law OF
surply ard demand, working without
artificial restraint.
But the fact is that the law of sup
ply and demand does not and has not
for many years worked in this country
in a natural unrestrained and unts--
tered manner. The government IL the
first instance interposes an artificial
restraint in the protective tariff on I'M
ports.
True, the theory of this tariff is to
euualize conditions of competition; to
place as it were. handicap on the
foreign competitor who has produced
his commodities under conditions less
burdensome than those under which
the American manufacturer produces
mis-.
But in fact the inequalities result
ing from the methods of tariff legislil-
ton, are very often impossible to JUS
tify on the theory of sufficient protec-
ton only, and the resulting price is
| that fixed by a limited competition be
tween dealers in the market from which
foreign competitors are to certain
extent excluded.
Fixed by Agreement.
Nor is this all: 1t is probably safe
| to say that in almost every one Of the
great staple industries prices have been
for years fixed by agreement between
/ the principal producers and not from
free play of competition among the do
mes tic producers, nor by the unfett cred
operation of the law of supply and de-
mand.
"The fact seems to be that the prices
of standard articles of consumption
sold in the United States for several
years past. have not been fixed at all
oy the operation of the laws of supply
and demand or Of unrestrained cum
! petition, but by associations of the
| producers, without the participation of
i q rlI1h
| that is, without those who have had
to pay the bin having any voice in
fixing the price.
In this view. it is certainly not
unreasonable that tho purchasing pub
lie should desire to have some part in
! determining the price it is to pay-in
like manner as has been recognized to
be just with respect to the cost of
| transportation.
| IF there be any assurance that the
free play of competition would be as
sured and the natural price resulting
from the unrestrained operation of
supply and demand maintained, then
no governmental supervision of these
beyond occasional prosecutions for
| violations of the Sherman law-would
/ be necessary.
But the habits formed through
years of following a system are not
easily shaken off, and the artificial
forms of organizations made neces-
sary by conflicting laws of many
states with those of the nation, will
| always present borderland of
doubt which will furnish on the one
hand. opportunities for those who
wish to violate the law to do so with
some show Of justification; and on
the other, to perpleX those who are
sincerely desirous of keeping the law
but by reason of the complexity and
| conflict of different state laws, find
it difficult to do so without seeming
to run counter to the antitrust law.
For the effectual regulation of both
of these classes, the supervision of a
federal commission is certainly desir-
able if not absolutely necessary.
In theory it would seem that such
a commission should have some pow
er over prices but the practical diff
ficulties in the way of so exercising
such power as not to inflict a greater
evil than that it is intended to cure,
are so great as perhaps to be insur-
lmounta BILE
Federal Incorporation Act.
Mr.. Wickersham implied that a
federal incorporation act while it
might offer some difficulties. would
| help to lay the axe at the root of the
| trust evil
The existing system" he said,
whereby every state charters cor
porations without the slightest regard
to other states or to the nation, en-
/ powered to roam at will-So far as
their creator is concerned-but sub
ject to any restriction or condition
which any other state into which they
may desire to go in carrying on thei:
| business chooses to impose, natural
| ly leads to a demand for authority in
one corporation to take and hold
stock in another. in order that the
business of q corporation organize e in
one state might be carried on in an
other state, without subjecting the
parent company and its entire CAPT
| tai and corporate organization to the
laws of the latter.
probably no one thing has done
more to facilitate restraint of trade
and the growth of monopoly than the
/ departure from the early rule of law
that ono corporation can not own
! stccI. in amt her That ilenartllre was