The Richmond climax. (Richmond, Ky.) 1897-1914, 1914-01-28

instantly approve Of such q commits
sion. It would not wish to see 1t en-
powered to make terms with monop-
oily or In any sort to assume control
of business. as If the government
made itself responsible. 1t demands
such commission only as an indis-
penHble instrument of information
and publicity, as clearing house for
the facts by which both the public
mind and the managers of great BUSH
ness undertakings should be guided,
and as an fundamentally for doing
Justice to business where the process
es of the courts or the natural 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 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 sim
liar organizations can be. Their dis
solution by ordinary legal process may
oftentimes involve financial conse-
Quences likely to overwhelm the Sc
curity market and bring upon 1t break
down and confusion. There ought to
be an administrative commission ca
pable Of directing and shaping such
corrective processes, not only in aid
Of the courts but also by indepndent
suggestion, II necessary.
Make Punishment Certain.
''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 it's legitimate course as little as
possible, we ought to see to 1t. and the
judgment Of practical and sagacious
men Of affairs everywhere would ap-
plaud US II we did see to 1t that pen
alties and punishments should fall.
not upon business itself. to it's confu-
sion and interruption. but upon the
individuals who use the instrumental
tiles of business to do things which
public policy and sound business prac-
tice condemn. Every act Of business
Is done at the command or upon the
initiative of some ascertainable per-
son or group of persons. These should
be held individually responsible and
the punishment should fall upon them,
not upon the business organization Of
which they make illegal use. It should
be one Of the main objects Of our leg
islation to divest such persons Of
their corporate cloak and deal with
them as with those who do not rep
resent their corporations, but merely
by deliberate intention break the law.
Business men the country through
would, l am sure. applaud US II we
were to take effectual steps to see
that the officers and directors of great
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
treatment. Enterprises, in these mod
ern days OF great individual fortunes.
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 single person or group
Of persons who are In some way in
timately related in interest.
Holding Companies.
I'VE 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, l suppose. to forbid the pur-
chase Of stocks by any person who
pleases to buy them In such quanti-
ties as he can afford, or In any way
arbitrarily to limit the sale of stocks
to bonafide purchasers. Shall we re-
quire the owners Of stock. when their
voting power In several companies
which ought to be Independent Of one
another would constitute actual con-
troll. to make selection In which OF
them they will exercise their right to
vote? This question venture for
your consideration.
There is another matter in which
imperative considerations Of Justice
and fair play suggests thoughtful
remedial 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 seri.
ously injure the individuals who are
put out of business In one fair way or
another by the many dislodging and
discriminating forces Of combination.
I 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 govern
ment where the government has upon
its own initiative sued the eombina-
lions complained of and won its suit,
and that the statute Of limitations
shall be suffered to run against such
litigants only from the date of the
conclusion of the governments action
Individual Justice.
ut Is not fair that the private liti-
CANT should be obliged to set up and
establish again the facts which the
government has proved. He cannot
afford. he has not the power to make
use of such processes Of inquiry as
the RnYernment has command of