« ForrigeFortsett »
or unless there are contracts on the part of responsible subscribers to make such payment. Furthermore, if any such corporation proposes to accept services or property in payment for stock it must obtain from the interstate trade commission a certificate of actual value, and take payment only at this value.
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THERE SHOULD NOT BE AN ATTEMPT TO REGULATE THE SHARES OF STOCK ISSUED BY CORPORATIONS EN. GAGED IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE.
We know of no argument which supports this proposal. If an interstate trade commission is created with power to require annual reports of all corporations engaged in interstate commerce, the publicity given to these reports will be an effectual corrective of any abuses that may exist. Enactment of the proposal of the Senate bill would impose upon the interstate trade commission a task of great proportions at the beginning of its career. Federal laws on the subject do not seem necessary.
The States which create the corporations have laws regulating issue of stocks, and some of the States have corporation commissions. Furthermore, legislation of this sort, being largely for protection of investors, belongs peculiarly within the jurisdiction of the States.
If there is to be Federal legislation in accordance with the Senate bill it should he enacted as part of a broad programme of federal incorporation of businesses which engage in interstate commerce.
Trust laws in Philippines
and Porto Rico edge. For example, whether or not the antitrust laws should be made operative
See page 18 in the Philippine Islands and Porto Rico, as is proposed by the House bill, must turn upon business conditions in these insular possessions and the nature of existing local laws.
The House bill so far as it relates to discrimination in prices, mine products, Foreign trade and exclusive contracts does not apply its restrictions to the export trade. It fails, however, to modify the Sherman Act in any way, and consequently does not admit of the sort of cooperation in foreign trade mentioned in recommendation number seven of our earlier report, in which the committee suggested that the interstate trade commission, if created, be asked to report as soon as possible upon the advisability of amending the Sherman Act in this respect.
Labor Unions The House bill, in section 7, declares that nothing contained in the antitrust laws is to be construed to forbid the existence and operation of labor, con- See page 19 sumers', agricultural, horticultural, or fraternal organizations instituted for mutual help and not for profit, nor to restrain memberts from carrying out the Attitude of Chamber legitimate objects of such organizations. In Referendum Number Three, concluded by the Chamber in June, 1913, the members of the Chamber voted decisively against a pending limitation on an appropriation to the effect that none of the money could be used in prosecution of labor unions, agricultural organizations, or their members for combinations or agreements having in view better hours, better wages, better conditions of employment, or better prices for products. The vote was 669 to 9. At the Annual Meeting held in February, 1914, the Chamber reaffirmed the principle of the referendum against discriminatory treatment of any class. To the sections of the House bill which refer to subjects discussed in this Injunctions
! report are added sections upon the unrelated subjects of regulation of injunctions See page 22 issued by Federal courts and of proceedings for contempt of Federal courts.
These sections do not belong in the bill. They deserve separate and careful Contempts consideration. As the principles involved do not come within the jurisdiction
See page 23 of a committee on trust legislation they have not been discussed in this report.
SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON TRUST LEGISLATION
R. G. RHETT, Chairman,
Mr. Clayton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Com
mittee on the Judiciary and ordered to be printed.
MAY 6, 1914.
to be printed
To supplement existing laws against unlawful restraints and monopolies, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatices of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That "antitrust laws," is used herein, includes the Ict entitled "An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies," approved July second, eighteen hundred and ninety; sections seventy-three to seventy-seven, inclusive, of an Act entitled "An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes," of August twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and ninety-four; an Act entitled “An Act to amend sections seventy-three anal seventy-six of the Act of August twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and ninety-four, entitled An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes,' approved February twelfth, nineteen hundred and thirteen; and also this Act.
"Commerce," as used herein, means trade or commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia or any Territory of the l’nited States and any State, Territory, or foreign nation, or between any insular possessions or other places under the jurisdiction of the United States, or between any such possession or place and any State or Territory of the United States or the District of Columbia or any foreign nation, or within the District of Columbia or any Territory or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States.
The word “person" or "persons” wherever used in this Act sliall be deen:ed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of citlier the United States, the laws of any of the Territories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country.
SEC. 2. That any person engaged in commerce who shall either directly or indirectly discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities in the same or different sections or communities, which commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, with the purpose or intent to thereby destroy or wrongfully injure the business of a competitor, of either such purchaser or seller, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $5.000, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both, in the discretion of the court: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent discrimination in price between purchasers of commodities on account of differences in the grade, quality, or quantity of the commodity sold, or that