New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-10-20
ROOSEVELT EXPLAINS
TRUST CONTROL PLAN
Tells How He Proposes TO
Handle Big Corporations by
industrial Commission.
WOULD HAVE LAW DEFINITE
Statutes Should Say What Was
Wrong, and Commission
Should Have Power to
Enforce Provisions.

CHICAGO oct l9-Colonel Roosevelt al
ear long conference with Francis j..
ueney. of San Francisco, made clear to-
6ov his attitude on the industrial commits
son by which he proposes the trust situa-
t,on shall be controlled in America.
His announcement came from the hos
pital, and was in reply to writings OF
Louis Brandeis and speeches of Governor
Wilson. in which Colonel Roosevelt was
accused Of "endeavoring to legalize
monopoly" by a commission which
would have police power to say 10 a
favored corporation You are legal, and
70 an unfavored corporation You are IL
legal
This absolutely is not my position"
said Colonel Roosevelt In fact, 1t is as
near tie antithesis of my position as any
declaration we'll could be"
Mr.. Heney brought the statement from
the coloneTs room, quoting the Progress
siye candidate as follows:
| explained in part my position in my
Milwaukee speech, when l SAID, IN erect
that the idea I had was that there De
passed new laws, or that the SHERMAN
antitrust act should be amended IN such
what was wrong, eliminating the RUE
Of reason" feature; that there shouid De
this commission which would nave the
power to sit in on the company S DOCKS
and business. and should have the right
10 bring about obedience TO the law when
infraCtiOnS were found.
/ had not made this explanation before
because ! did not realize that the state
mentS referred TO, directed against my
position. had brought about any erect
on the public mind, they seemed so APP
parently not my position.
Defines His Position.
have been informed however, that
my position is not clear TO ALL so l VIII
define il.
amendment Of the Sherman law 10 pro-
vide such supervision as that contained
in the la Follette-Lenroot amendments,
! would provide in the statute provisions
which would say, This thing is wrong,
OF That thing is wrong l would not
have lett to the guess or judgment OF any
man or men the determination OF what
was wrong OT right or reasonably
wrong or reasonably right.
IT, for instance, a corporation should be
found crushing out competition by TeiusS
ing 10 sell when the patron bought OF
competitors, or by underseillng IN as
tricts. or in the dozen Of other ways that
Congress should learn were being pTaC-
tised and should say were illegal,
would have the statute say point blank
with no lOOphUle for escape, tndt the
corporation was guilty.
would have the commission enforce the
Law much as the Interstate commerce
Commission enfOrCes the railroad rate and
rebate laws with power 10 see tAdl Iic
statute was ODeyed.
| would have the commission empowered
10 put men on the books OF corporation
whose acts were questioned, so that the
responsibility Of that corporation ana us
methods of conducting business WOuld DC
al all times within the view OF those
whose duty II is 10 enforce the law.
/ find / am accused OF wanting 10 give
the commission the power to NIX prices: l
do not want 10 provide that l fancy the
commission would be so busy for time
in enforcing laws that II would not want
. concern itself with prices.
In short, and urging that the widest pup
licity be given my Milwaukee speech IN
which I defined this thing, ] would nave
Congress provide law on its books that
would define what was wrong, so that
corporation would know before engaging
IN any act whether II was Or not NlolaIlhs
the law.
Then I would provide this industrial
commission with funds and power TO put
men on the books of the corporation so
the government would know whether the
law was violated. and the further power
10 compel corporations to observe the law
Corporations Under Control.
That would put corporations under as
complete control as the railroad sltuatiOI.
Is today. The railroad commission Dy
its power 20 do things / suggest Tor the
Industrial commission. pracucally M
eliminated rebating and other ills OF rail-
reading The commission would have as
wholesome effect on corporate business
Mr.. Heney added an explanation Of one
feature Of the proposed amendments TO
the Sherman antitrust act, Of which ne
was the author. and which, he said. Colo
mel Roosevelt fully approved. He eX-
planned:
Under the present plan, when the law
allows an Individual 10 recover ulpie
damages for injury by monopoly, II u
up to- the Individual 70 prove the WnoIe
case How absurd in, say, the case OF the
Standard OF Company, which cost the
government several million dollars.
Ny plan is this: When the government
obtains 4 judgment against the corpora
ton. a certified copy OF that judgment
shall be admitted as evidence In an indi-
Hiduals suit for recovery, and II shall De
conclusive proof that the accusations con-
tained In the original suit by the govern
ment were proved. The individual then
would have 10 prove only that ne was
damaged by the acts declared proved, and
now much he was damaged.
Mr. Heney said he would leave here at
once for Wisconsin TO make several
speeches, and then would go 10 his home
in California.