The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1912-09-16

Compared with the vague pretenses
ior both Wilson and Roosevelt on the
Antitrust issue is the following clear
and explicit statement of President
Taft from his address of acceptance:
The antitrust law was passed to
provide against the organization and
maintenance of combinations for the
manufacture and sale of commodities,
which, through restraint OF trade,
either BY contract and agreement or
by various methods of unfair competi-
Ition. should suppress competition,
establish monopoly and control prices.
The measure has been on the statute
book since 1890, and many times UNI
der construction by the courts, but
not until the litigation against the
Standard Oil Co. and against the
American Tobacco Co. reached the
supreme court did the statute receive
an authoritative construction which is
workable and ineligible.
New Constructive Legislation.
1t would aid the business public If
specific acts of unfair trade which
characterize the establishment Of I'M
lawful monopolies should be denounc-
ed as misdemeanors for the purpose,
first, OF making palmer to the public
what must be avoided, and, second,
for the purpose of furnishing such acts
by summary procedure without the
necessity for the formidable array OF
witnesses and the lengthy trials es-
sential to establish a general con-
spiracy under the present act But
there is great need for other con-
structive legislation of helpful kind.
Combination of capital in great enter
prises should be encouraged, If within
the law. for everyone must recognize
that progress in modern business is
by effective combination of the means
of production to the point of greatest
economy. 1t should be our purpose,
therefore, to put large interstate bust
ness enterprises acting within the law
en- basis of security by offering them
a federal corporation law under which
they may voluntarily incorporate.
Such an act is not an easy one to draw
in detail, but its general outlines are
clearly defined by the two objects OF
such a law. One is to secure for the
public, through competent govern
ment agency, such a close supervision
and regulation of the business trans
actions of the corporations as to pre-
elude violation of the antitrust and
other laws to which the business of
the corporation must square. and the
other is to furnish to business, thus
incorporated and lawfully conducted,
the protection and security which it
must enjoy under such federal char
ter With the faculties conferred by
such a charter. corporations could dc
business in all the states without
complying with connicting exactions
| of state legislatures, and could be OF
uniform taxation, i. e., uniform with
THAT imposed by the state on state
corporations in the same business.
Opposed to Proposed Drastic Amend
ments.
am not in sympathy with the pur
pose to make the antitrust law more
drastic by such provision as is pro
posed by the Democratic majority OF
the investigating committee of the
house, for imposing rule as to bur
den of proof upon defendants under
ANTITRUST prosecutions different from
that which defendants in other prose
cutions enjoy. This cannot be sug
Igested by any difficulty found in prov
4 ing to the courts the Illegally Of suci
combinations when the iliegality ex
lists. challenge the production of {
single record in any case in which al
\ Objectionable combination has escap
ed decree againt it because of an.
Il favorable rule as to the burden G
proof 1t is true that many defend
ants in criminal cases have escapes
by a failure of the jury to convict
but that arises from the reluctanc
and refusal of jurors to find verdict
upon which men are likely to be sen