6o6
THE GREEN BAG
The problem of regulating these affairs has attained its present magnitude largely because the federal government has neglected to exercise its constitutional power over the subject in the course of its development. UntiL the interstate commerce act was passed in 1887 the negative power of the courts was the only federal control. Even by them till 1886 the states were sustained in their authority over interstate as well as domestic rates of carriers. The truth is that the national government has so long neglected its powers under the commerce clause of the Constitution that now, when it tardily takes up its duties, it is charged by the states with usurpation. The political revolution of 1776 required the creation of a central political power because it gave rise to great political con cerns that could not be provided for by the several states. To-day as the result of an economic revolution quite as fundamental and far reaching there are certain great business interests that have become national in their character and extent which cannot be left to conflicting state authority. It is as unwise to stand timidly shrinking from the exercise of economic control now as it would have been a century ago to hold back from the exercise of political power through the fears of those who dreaded an adequate national government. We ought to look squarely at the nature and extent of our commerce and industry. Are they national? Ought they to be regulated by one or by fifty sovereignties? If in their nature and extent they are national, and in justice to the public and the interests to be regulated ought to be subject to a single authority, then we ought not to hold back from the exercise of the necessary power simply because it would add to the activities of the federal government. We cannot refrain from the exercise of necessary powers upon the ground that the federal govern
ment cannot perform the work wisely and efficiently without confessing that that government is inadequate to perform the duties which the nature of things and the Constitution alike devolve upon it. If national industry and commerce ought not to be subject to the jealousies and local interests of the several states, there is no alternative but to devolve their regulation upon the federal government. Between these two forms of regulation we must make our choice. The election is not between national regulation and some ideally perfect scheme; it lies between the single authority of the nation and the anarchy of the different states in combination with partial national control. The way, the duty, and the power are plain. Unless domestic conditions, such as in 1788 compelled the framing and adop tion of the Constitution, shall be impotent to compel the exercise of those powers granted by it in order that things which are national in their nature and extent may be controlled by national authority, there must be such an extension, not of constitutional power, but of the exercise of national powers already conferred as shall bring national commerce and industry under the single authority of the federal government. One hundred years ago those who opposed the adoption of the Constitution made "Con solidation " their cry of alarm. To-day those who oppose the control by the national government of the business affairs that have become national, raise the cry of " Cen tralization." The one cry is as foolish as the other. On both occasions the opposi tion is guilty of that highest political folly which consists in hanging to a theory regard less of changed conditions in life. Cen tralization has already taken place out there in the world of commerce and industry. The only question remaining is, Shall the government take cognizance of the fact? Fargo, N.D., August, 1907.
