The Washington times., 1914-01-20

! made itself responsible. 1t demands
such a commission only as an indis-
Dcnsable instrument of information
and publicity, as a clearing house for
the facts by which both the public
mind and the managers OF great
business undertakings should be
guided, and as an instrumentality for
doing Justice to business where the
processes of the courts or the nat
ural forces Of correction outside the
courts are inadequate to adjust the
remedy to the wrong in a way that
will meet all the equities and cir
cumstances of the case.
An Administrative Commission.
Producing industries, for example,
which have passed the point up to
which combination may be consist
mt with the public interest and the
Ereedom of trade, cannot always be
dissected into their component units
IS readily as railroad companies or
similar organizations can be. Their
dissolution by ordinary legal process
may oftentimes involve financial con-
sequences likely to Oyerwhelm the
security market and bring upon it
breakdown and confusion. There
ought to be an administrative COM
mission capable of directing and
shaping such corrective processes,
rot only in aid of the courts but also
by Independent suggestion, if neces-
sary.
Inasmuch as our object and the
spirit of our action in these matters
is to meet business half way in its
processes of self-correction and dis
tUrb its legitimate course as little as
possible, we ought to see to 1t, and
the judgment of practical and sa-
gacious men of affairs everywhere
would applaud US if we did see to
t, that penalties and punishments
should fall, not upon business it.
self, to its confusion and Interrupt
ton. but upon the individuals who
use the instrumentalities of business
. do things which public policy and
.Ound business practice condemn.
very act of business is done at the
ommand or upon the initiative of
ONE ascertainable person or group of
nerSons. These should he held individ-
Ualy responsible and the punishment
hould fall upon them, not upon the
BUSINESS organization of which they
make illegal use. 1t should be one
nf the main objects of our legislation
% divest such persons of their cor
norate cloak and deal with them as
With those who do not represent
heir corporations, but merely by de-
iberate intention break the law.
Controlling Private Interests.
Business men the country through
would, 1 am sure, applaud US if we
we're to take effectual steps to see
hat the officers and directors of
great busines bodies were prevented
from bringing them and the business
of the country into disrepute and
danger.
Other questions remain which will
need very thoughtful and practical
rreatment. Enterprises, in these
modern days of great individual for
tunes, are oftentimes interlocked, not
b. being under the control of the
same directors, but by the fact that
the greater part of their corporate
stock is owned by a single person or
group Of persons who are in some
way intimately related in interest.
We are agreed, take it, that holding
,ompanies SHOULD be prohibited, but
What of the controlling private own
rship of individuals or actually CO.
operative groups of individuals? ?
Shall the private owners of capital
stock be suffered to be themselves
n effect holding companies? We do
not wish, l suppose, TO forbid the
purchase of stocks by any person
Who pleases to buy them in such
Quantities as he can afford, or in any
way arbitrarily to limit the sale Of
stocks to bona fide purchasers. Shall
we require the owners of stock, when
heir voting power in several COM
yanies which ought to be independ-
ent of one another would constitute
actual control, TO make election in
which of them they will exercise
heir right to vote? This question |
enture for your consideration.
Give Right of Redress.
mere Is duOlHtT Ildlltl III NillNiA
imperative considerations of justice
and fair play suggest thoughtful
remedial action. Not only do many
= the combinations effected or
sought to be effected in the indus
rial world work an injustice upon
ne ublic in general; they also di-
Icctly and seriously injure the indi-
lduals who are put out of business
70 one unfair way or another by the
any dislodging and eXterminating
yrces of combination. I hope that
e shall agree in giving private in
lyiduals who claim to have been
ujured by these processes the right
q found their suits for redress upon
'le facts and judgments proved and
inferred in suits by the Government
where the Government has upon its
own initiative sued the combinations
complained of and won its suit, and
hat the statute of limitations shall
Jc suffered to run against such llu-
-ants only from the date OF the con-
.1uS!on of the Governments action.
Il is not fair that the private litgant
hould be obliged to set up and es-
ablish again the facts which the
cpyarD,re,t hoe prpvad He cannot