The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-11-01

tion before tt entered intee tate busi- ness be reuOired Co eubuit Its incor- poration, It's status, ts trse condition to a board crsated for Inc nufpose and to obtain 1icersa fu oa interstate business. The charfee should be made subject to foitsItura A3r Fi1l tion or Its provisions, hs rss9. WHS such machinery to ster 4efEa, Mr llttleton said, specific Jaws for the guidance and control" CT inteHata1e concerns could be passed ! Congress
 Responding to tho t9a45 "inaustrial Liberty" Represaata ave 4attia of New York per:inently asked EC c5i we preserve centralized i1ius-ry ald 2 the same time insure inil stHiHl ioe and answering it himself Qnolsa st Agth from his legal authorities i0e4uding a statement credited 70 8-i. Taft While secretary of war in speech at Bath, Me-, in 1906, when he said: "It would seem as if congress itself knew that the evil existed, but had a most indefinite idea of how it was to be checked
 Construed literally this staute could be used to punish combinations of present useful character like partnerships and other business arrangements conceded by all to be legitimate and proper; and the difficulty in all It's construction has been to draw law effective to suppress the real evil aimed at by the legislatures and to furnish proper and clear rule for the guidance of business men, while not interfering with legitimate combina- ton which congress had no purpose to prevent, was the sentiment of MT. Taft, MT. Littleton read.
 Continuing Mir Littieton said:
 "The common law has been cited fre- ouently to sustain the Sherman antitrust law Mir. Justice White emphasize the fact that neither the common law nor the Sherman law denounce monopoly in the concrete. But you will search in vain for any common law which vaguely de- .clared that every contract, combination CT agreement in restraint of trade shall be unlawful.
 "The real vice in the treatment of the whole problem is in the attempt to !egis- late solely against the result or effect of series of acts instead of specifications defining and prohibiting these acts.
 Whatever may be the precise deflni- tlon of a monopoly it is built up by a succession of acts of labor ingenuity and genius which, if arrested at a particular pcint, would leave it simply as large and useful industry.
 Tt is the addition of these practices of oppression. suppression of competition on account of rebates from railroads, factory agreements and like sinister and secret anti-social acts which converts a large and useful industry into vicius monopoly. It Is these attributes of industry and business which should be cut off. Compe- tition is not a concrete thing to be pre- served. It may be strangled to death by superior strength unjustly used. It must be free but not by coddling and inefficient or holding every one back for the laggard.
 Tt seems to me we must first con- ceive the definite field of interstate com merce. Within the compass of this ter ritory the power of the federal govern ment Is supreme.
 Interstate commerce is almost wholly carried on by incorporated concerns de- irving theiR corporate charter from some state. It frequently happens that the initial safeguards surrounding the incor- porating of these concerns are loose and inefficient We must, in our opinion, final ly and adequately set ourselves to the task of strengthening these initial safe guards. It is bound to come to this. The concern proposing to assume corporate