Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1920-03-03
COMPLETING THE CIRCLE
IN TRUST BUSTING"
The Corporations and the Public Meet
once More With a New coneep-
tion Of Mutual Obllqatlons


thing.
The decision is based on the theory
that the public interest is the first thing
to be considered in all litigation under the
antitrust laws. A big corporation is not
a criminal unless it does something
wrong. The mere fact of bigness is not
an offense.
In the years that have passed since the
first antitrust laws were enacted all
sorts Of views have been held for a little
while, but we have now arrived at the
point where the question can be consid-
cred on its merits and where each corpo-
ration must be regarded as guilty or in
nocent, according as it conserves the pub
lie interest or disregards it.
Charles NJ. Schwab, although busi-
ness competitor, did more than all the
lawyers for the defense in securing the
decision vindicating the Steel Corpora
tion.
The case against the corporation rested
OH the charge that it was conspiracy in
restraint of trade. The suit was begun
in 1911 before the Bethlehem Steel Com
pany had expanded to its present size. In
the intervening years Mr.. Schwab, in
spite of the competition of the great steel
combination engineered by J. Pierpont
Morgan, has built up business of great
size and has been able to hold his own in
all the markets of the world. If the
United States Steel Corporation were
monopolistic conspiracy Mr.. Schwab
could not have done this.
The facts in the steel business were
against the contention of the govern
ment. Every one outside of the Supreme
Court knew it; and the court, taking cog
nizance of these facts and bowling to the
undoubted sentiment of the people, has
acquitted the Steel Corporation. Other
and more technical legal reasons are as
signed for the decision, but this was the
controlling reason.
This is why the nation has confidence
in its highest court. That body is much
more responsive to popular sentiment
than the President or than Congress. 1t
interprets the laws and the constitution
in conformity with the popular will.
Popular sentiment would have been
outraged in 1850 at decisions affecting
the power of Congress over interstate
commerce which are accepted today as a
matter of course. And the court of 1850
would have handed down decisions in con-
formitv with the sentiment of the period.
Thus the national constitution becomes
a vital document, responsive to the needs
of each generation, instead of pro-
crustean bed to fit which the court will
amputate the legs of a growing entity.
Our great tribunal, conscious of its high
responsibility, expands the bed to ac-
commodate that which must lie in it.
But there are larger questions involved
in this decision than the guilt or inno-
cence of the United States Steel Corpora
tion. They are connected with the popu-
lar attitude toward all big corporations.
When the stock company began to dis
place the partnership and when stock
companies engaged in the same or kim
dred lines of business began to combine
there was widespread hostility to the
new method of doing business.
twenty-five years ago every big cor
poration was guilty" We did not know
lust what it was guilty Of, but it was
some kind of a criminal. 1t was soulless
and could not be punished in way to
hurt it and politicians and newspapers
began to demand that guilt be made per-
sonal, which meant that the president
and the directors should be sent to prison
for constructive otfenses,
Bipness in itself was regarded as a
crime.
There were men who insisted that a
corporation which did 60 per cent of the
business in its line should be treated as
prima facie guilty of crime.
But little saving common sense pre-
vented US from going very far in this
direction. 1t was only necessary to ask
how it was possible for a corporation
doing 500 per cent of the business in its
! line could be innocent while corporation
doing one-tenth of per cent more busi-
ness could be guilty in order to make the
whole theory of basng guilt on percent
ages appear ridiculous.
| The Sherman antitrust law was passed
in the period when the popular view was
| that all combinations of corporations
we're made to gouge the public. The cor
porations protested, but they were un-
| needed. They insisted that they had a
right to do what they would with their
| own. In this they, too, were wrong.
In twenty-five years the whole attitude
of the corporations toward the public and
of the public toward the corporations has
! changed. :.
The public recognizes the corporation
as a natural and necessary business evo'
luton to meet the needs OF big nation
with a great population that could not be
eficiently served by the methods of oui
grandfathers.
And the corporations now recognize
the right of the public to regulate then
IN the general interest. They have dis
covered that they are protected by such
regulation against ruinous methods by
unscrupulous competitors and that they
profit as much as the public. They have
learned their lesson.
Naitbar the railroads nor the othel