The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1914-01-23

tered because 1t could not obtain fur
thcr ard more explicit Legislative def.
milton of the policy and meaning of
the existing antitrust law. Nothing
hampers business like uncertainty
Nothing daunts or discourages II like
the necessity 10 take chances, to run
the risk OF falling under the con.
make sure just what the law is. Sure
~ We are sufficiently familiar with
the actual processes and methods OF
monopoly and OF the many hurtful re-
possible, at any rate up to the limits
OF what experience has disclosed
These practices, being now abundant
~ disclosed can be explicitly and
item by item forbidden by statute in
such terms as will practically elimi
nate uncertainty. the law itself and
the penalty being made equally plain
Would Punish individuals.
lnasmuch as our object and the
1l4Ill VI Jul aNllpAl III illF0f tl4dAAtl
IS to meet business half way in its
process OF self,correction and dis
turb It's legitimate course as little rs
possible, we ought to see to II. and
the Judgment Of practical and saga
Ci0us men OF affairs everywhere
would applaud us If we did see to 1t
that penalties and punishments
, should fall not upon business itself
60 ils confusion aud interruption. but
upon the individuals who use the In
strumentalitios OF business to Dc
/ things which public policy and sOunC
/ business practice condemn. Every
anr Of business Is done at the com
Wand or upon the Initiative Of som,
garertalnablc person or group of per
sons These should not be held indi
, H1ually responsible and the punish
mnt should fall upon, not upon III,
i hHsincss organization of which they
make Illegal usr It should be oul
OF the main objects Of our Legislation
10 divc.t such persons Of their cor
r0ratc cloak and deal with them a
with those who do not represent lhpH
,nruorations. but merely by dpl.l.r
g.n intention break the law Busluos
men the country through would. ] an
sure. applaud MS ~ we were to talk
,Nactual steps 70 sec that IL" Office.
and directors Of great business b1li,
were prevented from bringing then
aud the business Of the country int
disrcputc and danger.
To Prohibit Holding Companies.
other questions remain which vii
need very thoughtful and pracuca
treatment Enterprises IN these mod
crn days Of great individual fortune
are o'tantimcs interlochcd not by b.
Ing unaor the control of the same dt
rCctors, but by the fact that the grna,
: or pa.t Of their corporate stock &
owrnG by single person or grouI
Of persons who are in some way In
timatciy related in interest. We ar
agreed ! take II. that holding CON
panies should be prohibited, but wna
Of the controlling private owutr-hl,
Of individuals or actually oopcrau,
groups OF individuals Shall The pii
yate owners OF capital stock be- SUI
fered to be themselves In effect hold
ing companies? We do not wish.
suppose. to forbid the purchase o
stocks by any person who pleases {,
buy them IN such quantities as he cm
afford, or In any way arbitrarily t,
= limit the sale Of stocks to bona fid
( purchasers Shall We require the own
ers of stock. when their voting powe
in several companies which ought L
be independent of one another woult
constitute actual control. to maxi
election in which OF them they vii
exercise their right to vote? Thl
question ! venture for your considera
ton.
There Is another mntter III W lei
imperative considerations of justlc
and fair play suggest thoughtful re
medal action. Not only do many o
the combinations effected or sough
TO be effected in the Industrial worl,
work an injustice upon the public Il
general; they also directly and ser
ously injure the individuals who ar
put out OF business in one unfair wa
or another by the many dislodgin
and exterminating forces OF combinf
ton. ] hope that we shall agree /,
/ giving private individuals who CLAIM
to have been injured by these pre-
cesses the right to found their suit
| by the government where the govern
ment has upon its own initiative sue
the combined complained of and wo
its suit and that the statute of lin
tations shall be suffered TO ru
/ against such litigants only from tn
date OF the conclusion of the govern
ment's action. II is not fair that tn
/ private litigant should be obliged I
set up and establish again the fact
| which the government has proved. II
cannot afford, he has not the power
to make use of such processes OF In
| qulry an the government has con
mnnd Of. Thus shall individual jus
tice be done. while the processes Q
/ business are rectified and square,
with the general conscience.
o-o~~s~o~N.~~N.os~~-o
To Whiten ivory.
To whiten ivory rub it well wit