Norwich bulletin., 1912-12-07

sherman antitrust law has gone on without restraint or diminutioh. and decrees similar to those entered in the Standard Oil and the tobacco cases have been entered in other suits. like the suits against the powder trust and the bathtub trust. am very strongly convinced that steady, consistent course in this regard, with continu- ing of supreme court decisious upon new phases of the trust question not already finally decided. is going to of. fer g solution of this much discussed and troublesome issue in quiet. calm and judicial way without any radical legislation changing the governmental policy in regard to combinations now denounced by the sherman antitrust law.
 have already recommended as an aid in this matter legislation which would declare unlawful certain we'll known phases of unfair competition in interstate trade. and have also advocated voluntary national ineOr- poration for the larger industrial eB, terprises, with provision for a closer supervision hy the bureau of corpora Hons or board appointed for the pur- pose, so as to make more certain com plianee with the antitrust law on the one hand and to give greater security to the stockholders against possible prosecutions on the otber.
 l believe. however, that the orderly course of litigation in the courts and the regular prosecution of trusts eharg- cd with the violation Of the antitrust law is producing among business Ben q clearer and clearer perception of the line of distinction between business that is to be encouraged and business that is to be condemned and that in this quiet way the question of trusts can be settled and competition retain ed as m economic force to secure req condolences in prices and freedom and independence in trade,
 Reform of Court Procedure.
 I am glad to bring to the attention of congress the fact that the supreme court has radically altered the equity rules governing the procedure on the equity side of all federal courts, and though, as these changes have not been yet put tn practice so as to enable us to state from actual results what the reform will accomplish, they are of such a character that we can reason ably prophecy that they will greatly reduce the time aud cost of litigation in such courts. The court has adopted many of the shorter methods Of the present English procedure. and. while it may take little while for the pro fession te accusbom itself to these methods, it is certain greatly to faciIi- tate litigation. The action of the su- preme court has heen so drastic and so full of appreeia ton of the necessity for great reform in court procedure that have no hesitation in following up this action with recommendation which fereshadowed in my message of three years sgo, that the sections ot the statute governing the procedure in the federal courts on the common law side should be so amended as to give to the supreme court the same right to make rules of procedure in common law as they have since the beginning of the court exercised in equity.
 do not doubt that full considera, ton of the subject will enable the court while giving effect to the sub stantial differences in right and rene dy between the system of common
 law and the system of equity so tt
 unite the two procedures into the form of one civil action and to shorten the procedure in such civil action as tt furnish 6 model to all the state courts exercising concurrent jurisdiction with the federal courts of first instance, q
 Under the statute now in force ths common law procedure in each federal
 court is made to conform to the pro
 ceAure tn the state in whieh the eeurt is held In these days, when we
 should be making progress in eourt procedure, such conformity statute
 makes the federal method too depend ent upon the action of state legisM lures l can but think 1t . great up portunity for congress to intrust t, the highest tribunal in this country evidently imhued with strong spiri
 in favor ot a reform of procedure, th, power to frame model code of pro | eedure. which. while preserving al
 that is valuable and necessary of th' rights and remedies at common law
 and in equity. shall lessen the burdel
 of the poor litigant te mintmum II 1 the expedition and cheapness witt which his cause ean be fought or de
 tended through federal courts to ana judgment
 Worknan's cempensatien Act. : I say again that I think no act cal
 have 6 better effect directly mon tn.
 relations hetween the employer ana 1 employee than this act applying l railroads and common carriers of sT l interstate character, and l am snF' that the passage of the act wOnlG greatly relieve the courts ef rue heav
 fest burden of iisstiea that thel
 have and weHld snahe them to dis i patch 6ther business with q speed nsy CT before attained i'll courts of justice in this ceuntry,
 The White House. Dee, lAl2. Loua ana aC9t rs1sl,