The enterprise. [volume] (Harlem, Mont.) 1899-1926, 1914-01-29

OF the courts or the natural forces OF
correction outside the courts are in.
adequate to adjust the remedy to the
wrong in q way that will meet all the
equities and circumstances OF the
case.
Producing industries, for example.
which have passed the point up to
which combination may be consistent
with the public interest and the free
dom of trade, cannot always be dis.
sected into their component units as
readily as railroad companies or SINH
lar organizations can be. Their dis.
solution by ordinary legal process
may oftentimes involve financial con-
sequences likely to overwhelm the Sc
curity market and bring upon it break
downs and confusion. There ought
to be an administrative commission
capable of directing and shaping such
corrective processes, not only in aid
OF the courts, but also by independent
suggestion, if necessary.
To Meet Business Halfway.
Inasmuch as our object and the
spirit Of our actor. in these matters
Is tn meet business halfway in it's
processes of self-correction and dis.
tllrb it's legitimate course as little as
possible. we ought to see to it, and
the Judgment of practical and saga
cions men of affairs everywhere
would applaud us if we did see to it,
that penalties and punishments
should fall, not upon business itself,
to its confusion and interruption, but
upon the individuals who use the in
strumentalities of business to do
things which public policy and sound
business practice condemn.
Every act of business is done at
the command or upon the initiative
of some ascertainable person or group
of persons. These should be held in.
dividually responsible and the punish
ment should fall upon them, not upon
the business organization of which
they make illegal use. 1t should be
one of the main objects of our legis-
lation to divest such persons of their
corporate cloak and deal with them
as with those who do not represent
their corporations, but merely by de-
liberate intention break the law.
Business men the country through
would, I am sure, applaud us if we
were to take effectual steps to SEQ
that the officers and directors of
great business bodies were prevented
from bringing them and the business
0f ;1+o
danger
Other Questions Remain.
Other questions remain which will
need very thoughtful and practical
treatment. Enterprises, in these
modern days of great individual for
tunes, are oftentimes interlocked, not
by 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 1t, that hold
ing companies should be prohibited.
but what of the controlling private
ownership of individuals or actually
cooperative groups of individuals?
Shall the private owners of capital
stock be suffered to be themselves in
effect holding companies? We do not
wish, suppose, to forbid the pur-
chase of stocks by any person who
pleases to buy them in such quantities
as he can afford, or in any way arbi-
trarily to limit the sale of stocks to
bona fide purchasers. Shall we re.
quire the owners Of stock, when their
voting power in several companies
which ought to be dependent of one
another would constitute actual con.
troll, to make election in which of
them they will exercise their right
to vote? This question l venture for
your consideration.
Others Are Injured.
There is another matter in which
imperative consideration of Justice
and fair play suggest thoughtful rem.
edial action. Not only do many of the
combinations effected or sought to
be effected in the Industrial world
work an injustice upon the public in
general; they also directly and Sc.
riously injure the individuals who
are put out of business in one unfair
way or another by the many dislodg-
ing and DISCRIMINATING forces of COM
bnations. l hope that we shall agree
in giving private individuals who
claim to have been injured by these
processes the right to found their
suits for redress upon the facts and
judgments proved and entered in
suits by the government where the
government has upon it's own initia-
tive sued the combinations complain
ed of and won it's suit, and that the
statute of limitations shall be suf-
fered to run against such lit;gants
only from the date of the conclusion
Of the governments action 1t is not
fair that the private litigant should
be obliged to set up and establish
again the facts which the government
has proved. He can not afford, he has
NOT the nnwpr tn ynolyo ,,co of c,,ol,