The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-03-26


technically ~violators of statutes which
it is not advantageous from the pup-
lie point of view to enforce.
For q, number of years 1t has ap-
neared TO me that the Interstate Com
naerce Commission, and h numerous
state commissions having tho controi
of public utilities, and the pure 1000
commission clearly point the way loI
he next step In the solution or QUE
industrial problems.
The most fundamental difference
between the United states steer Cor
poratfon. the Standard OIL
and other very large businesses ana
the public utilities, is that u CLASS
has been declared to be vested with d
public interest and h other q NOT
Every business that is so large as TO
be vested with a public interest should
he subject to control. Not only so,
but wherever different companies OIL
groups Of companies cooperate so
that they control the market for any
article, their transactions become
vested with a public interest. An In
terstate trade commission should De,
created for interstate commerce ano
state trade commissions for state
commerce, each to have control over
business which is vested with a pub
lie interest or in which h market
is controlled, precisely as the nubIc
utilities commissions have control
over the public utilities. 1t is to be
noted that this proposal does not
imply that the administrative com
missions shall have control or all
business, but only business which. Pc
cause of magnitude, or because OF
cooperation, becomes vested with a
public interest. The initiative in con-
troll of business will remain with the
business organizations precisely the
same as at present; but whenever
an organization performs any act,
which, in the opinion Of the appro-
pirate commission under the powers
granted is contrary to the public in"
terest, that body nay intervene.
The powers Of such a commission
cannot be discussed in an address;
but the bill introduced by Chairman
Clayton Of the House Judiciary Com
mittee. to create an interstate trade
commission and define its powers and
duties. and supposed to be approved
by President Wilson, Is along the right
lines. Possibly at the outset, this
commission may not be given suf1-
cient powers in all respects; but pre-
cisely as the Interstate Commerce
Commission has had it's powers in
creased from time to time, SO he pro-"
posed Interstate Trade Commission
could have it's powers increased by
congress when experience shows this
to be necessary.
However, to create a trade COM
mission does not fully meet the ex-
listing situation. It is necessary that
an act be passed to supplement the
Sherman Act. AS noted the supreme
court has already declared that, so
far as combinations are concerned,
the Sherman Act permits reasonable
restraint Of trade; out the decisions
of the court nave not made clear the
extent to which corporations will be
permitted as reasonable.
My proposal is that restraint Of
trade, either by combination or CON
tract, n cooperation in limitation
Of output division Of territory, or
fixing Of prices, be prohibited so far
as they are inimical to the welfare
Of the public. Not only so, but it may
be wise to make a presumption that
actions Of corporations along the
above lines are inimical to the welfare
Of h public until approved by the
commission. Blu when any act of
cooperation has been approved by the
appropriate commission it should be
free from attack. BY this simple
the situation becomes clear
ed. Cooperation for all classes of bust
ness would be allowed to continue,
SO far as it was not inimical to the
public welfare.
Can there be any justification for
going further than the proposal made,
that for all classes of corporations
all practices inimical to the public
welfare be prohibited? For practices
not inimical to the general welfare
what possible reason can be given
for their inhibition?
If the simple principle be adopted
that cooperation not detrimental to
the public interest is legitimate. in
the proposed act supplemental to
the Sherman law, the list of unfair
practices and the nature of things
which may become Objectionable may
be severe. The presumption may be
made against the proposal of any
organization to enter into any con-
tract Or combination in restraint of
trade; and it can do so legally only
if the proposal is found to be s
able and not contrary to the welfare
Of the public by the commission hav-
ing jurisdiction.
Cooperation of manufacturers NAV
be inimical to the welfare Of the peo-
pie, or it may be beneficial. Where