Corporations are necessary to the effective use of the forces of

production and commerce under modern conditions. We cannot effectively

prohibit all combinations without doing far-reaching economic harm; and

it is mere folly to do as we have done in the past—to try to combine

incompatible systems—that is, to try both to prohibit and regulate

combinations. Combinations in industry are the result of an imperative

economic law which cannot be repealed by political legislation. The

effort at prohibiting all combination has substantially failed. The only

course left is active corporate regulation—that is, the control of

corporations for the common good—the suppression of the evils that they

work, and the retention, as far as may be, of that business efficiency

in their use which has placed us in the forefront of industrial peoples.

I need waste no words upon our right so to control them. The corporation

is the creature of government, and the people have the right to handle

it as they desire; all they need pay attention to is the expediency of

realizing this right in some way that shall be productive of good and

not harm. The corporate manager who achieves success by honest

efficiency in giving the best service to the public should be favored

because we all benefit by his efficiency. He realizes Abraham Lincoln’s

definition which I have quoted above, because he works for his own

material betterment and at the same time for the “amelioration of

mankind,” and he should be helped by the Government because his success

is good for the National welfare. But a man who grasps and holds

business power by breaking the industrial efficiency of others, who wins

success by methods which are against the public interest and degrading

to the public morals, should not be permitted to exercise such power.

Instead of punishing him by a long and doubtful process of the law after

the wrong has been committed, there should be such effective Government

regulation as to check the evil tendencies at the moment that they start

to develop. Overcapitalization in all its shapes is one of the prime

evils; for it is one of the most fruitful methods by which unscrupulous

men get improper profits, and when the holdings come into innocent hands

we are forced into the uncomfortable position of being obliged to reduce

the dividends of innocent investors, or of permitting the public and the

wage-workers, either or both, to suffer. Such really effective control

over great inter-State business can come only from the National

Government. The American people demands the new Nationalism needful to

deal with the new problems; it puts the National need above sectional or

personal advantage; it is impatient of the utter confusion which results

from local legislatures attempting to treat National issues as local

issues; it is still more impatient of the National impotence which

springs from the over-division of governmental powers; the impotence

which makes it possible for local selfishness, or for the vulpine legal

cunning which is hired by wealthy special interests, to bring National

activities to a deadlock.

The control must be exercised in several different ways. It may be that

National incorporation is not at the moment possible; but there must be

some affirmative National control, on terms which will secure publicity

in the affairs of and complete supervision and control over the big,

Nation-wide business corporations; a control that will prevent and not

legalize abuses. Such control should imply the issuance of securities by

corporations only under thoroughgoing Governmental supervision, and

after compliance with Governmental requirements which shall effectually

prevent overcapitalization. Such control should protect and favor the

corporation which acts honestly, exactly as it should check and punish,

when it cannot prevent, every species of dishonesty.

In the Inter-State Commerce Commission and in the Federal Bureau of

Corporations we have bodies which, if their powers are sufficiently

enlarged after the right fashion, can render great and substantial

service. The average American citizen should have presented to him in a

simple and easily comprehended form the truth about the business affairs

that affect his daily life as consumer, employee, employer, as investor,

as voter. The issue of securities should be subject to rigorous

Government supervision. There are concrete instances of unfair

competition that can be reached under the Federal criminal legislation,

and they should be attacked and destroyed in the courts. But the laws

should be such that normally, and save in extraordinary circumstances,

there should be no need of recourse to the courts. What is needed is

administrative supervision and control. This should be so exercised that

the highways of commerce and opportunity should be open to all; and not

nominally open, but really open, a consistent effort being made to

deprive every man of any advantage that is not due to his own

superiority and efficiency, controlled by moral purpose. The National

Bureau of Corporations has not been given the powers or the funds to

develop its full usefulness, and yet it offers one of the prime means at

the disposal of the people of keeping them fully acquainted with all the

facts about corporation control. We have a right to expect from this

Bureau and from the Inter-State Commerce Commission a very high grade of

public service. We should be as sure of the proper conduct of

inter-State railways and the proper management of inter-State business

as we are now sure of the conduct and management of the National banks,

and we should have as effective supervision in one case as in the other.

Not only as a matter of justice and honesty, but as a matter of prime

popular interest, we should see that this control is so exercised as to

favor a proper return to the upright business manager and honest

investor. In the matter of railway rates, for instance, it is just as

much our duty to see that they are not too low as that they are not too

high. We must preserve the right of the railway employee to proper wages

and the right of the investor to proper interest as scrupulously as we

preserve the right of the shipper and the producer and the consumer. We

cannot afford to do injustice, or suffer it to be done, to any of these.

But in order to do justice we must have full knowledge. We must have the

right to find out every fact connected with the business of the railway,

so as to base our judgment, not on any one fact, but on all taken

together. Inasmuch as it is so often impossible to punish wrongs done in

the past, and to prevent the consequences of the wrongs thus committed

being felt by one innocent class, without shifting the burden to the

shoulders of another innocent class, we ought to provide that hereafter

business shall be carried on from its inception in such a way as to

prevent swindling. Incidentally, this will also tend to prevent that

excessive profit by one man, which may not be swindling, under existing

laws, but which nevertheless is against the interest of the

commonwealth; To know all the facts is of as much interest to the

investor and the wageworker as to the shipper, the producer, the

consumer. Full knowledge of the past helps us in dealing with the

future. If we find that high rates are due to overcapitalization in the

past, or to any kind of sharp practice in the past, then, whether or not

it is possible to take action which will partly remedy the wrong, we are

certainly in a better position to prevent a repetition of the wrong.

Let me, in closing, put my position in a nutshell. When I say that I am

for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under

the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having these rules

changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and

of reward for equally good service. So far as possible, the reward

should be based upon service; and this necessarily implies that where a

man renders us service in return for the fortune he receives, he has the

right to receive it only on terms just to the whole people. For this

reason there should be a heavily progressive National inheritance tax on

big fortunes. The really big fortune, by the mere fact of its size,

acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree

from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. A heavily

progressive inheritance tax on all such fortunes (heaviest on absentees)

has the good qualities of an income tax, without its drawbacks; it is

far more beneficial to the community at large, and far less burdensome

to private individuals, as well as far more easily collected. A

moderate, but progressive, income tax, carefully devised to fall

genuinely on those who ought to pay, would, I believe, be a good thing;

but a heavy and heavily progressive inheritance tax on great fortunes

would be a far better thing.

I have tried to set before you my creed. I believe in property rights,

but I believe in them as adjuncts to, and not as substitutes for, human

rights. I believe that normally the rights of property coincide with the

rights of man; but where they do not, then the rights of man must be put

above the rights of property. I believe in shaping the ends of

government to protect property; but wherever the alternative must be

faced, I am for man and not for property. I am far from underestimating

the importance of dividends, but I rank dividends below human character.

I know well that if there is not sufficient prosperity the people will

in the end rebel against any system, no matter how exalted morally; and

reformers must not bring upon the people permanent economic ruin, or the

reforms themselves will go down in the ruin. But we must be ready to

face any temporary disaster—whether or not brought on by those who will

war against us to the knife—if only through such disaster can we attain

our goal. And those who oppose all reform will do well to remember that

ruin in its worst form is inevitable if our National life brings us

nothing whatever but a swollen and badly distributed material

prosperity. In other words, I feel that material interests are chiefly

good, not in themselves, but as an indispensable foundation upon which

we should build a higher superstructure, a superstructure without which

the foundation becomes worthless. Therefore I believe that the destinies

of this country should be shaped primarily by moral forces, and by

material forces only as they are subordinated to these moral forces. I

believe that material wealth is an exceedingly valuable servant, and a

particularly abhorrent master, in our National life. I think one end of

government should be to achieve prosperity; but it should follow this

end chiefly to serve an even higher and more important end—that of

promoting the character and welfare of the average man. In the long run,

and inevitably, the actual control of the government will be determined

by the chief end which the government subserves. If the end and aim of

government action is merely to accumulate general material prosperity,

treating such prosperity as an end in itself and not as a means, then it

is inevitable that material wealth and the masters of that wealth will

dominate and control the course of national action. If, on the other

hand, the achievement of material wealth is treated, not as an end of

government, but as a thing of great value, it is true—so valuable as to

be indispensable—but of value only in connection with the achievement of

other ends, then we are free to seek through our government, and through

the supervision of our individual activities, the realization of a true

democracy. Then we are free to seek not only the heaping up of material

wealth, but a wise and generous distribution of such wealth so as to

diminish grinding poverty, and, so far as may be, to equalize social and

economic no less than political opportunity.

The people as a whole can be benefited morally and materially by a

system which shall permit of ample reward for exceptional efficiency,

but which shall nevertheless secure to the average man who does his work

faithfully and well, the reward to which he is entitled. Remember that I

speak only of the man who does his work faithfully and well. The man who

shirks his work, who is lazy or vicious, or even merely incompetent,

deserves scant consideration; we may be sorry for his family, but it is

folly to waste sympathy on the man himself; and it is also folly for

sentimentalists to try to shift the burden of blame from such a man

himself to “society;” and it is an outrage to give him the reward given

to his hard-working, upright, and efficient brother. Still less should

we waste sympathy on the criminal; there are altogether too many honest

men who need it; and one chief point in dealing with the criminal should

be to make him understand that he will be in personal peril if he

becomes a lawbreaker. I realize entirely that in the last analysis, with

the nation as with the individual, it is private character that counts

for most. It is because of this realization that I gladly lay myself

open to the charge that I preach too much, and dwell too much upon moral

commonplaces; for though I believe with all my heart in the

nationalization of this Nation—in the collective use on behalf of the

American people of the governmental powers which can be derived only

from the American people as a whole—yet I believe even more in the

practical application by the individual of those great fundamental

moralities.

A certain type of rather thinly intellectual man sneers at these

moralities as “commonplaces;” and base and evil men, selfish and

shortsighted men, are immensely pleased to see them denounced and

derided. Yet surely it is the duty of every public man to try to make

all of us keep in mind, and practice, the moralities essential to the

welfare of the American people. It is of vital concern to the American

people that the men and women of this great Nation should be good

husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, sons and daughters; that we

should be good neighbors, one to another, in business and in social

life; that we should each do his or her primary duty in the home without

neglecting the duty to the State; that we should dwell even more on our

duties than on our rights; that we should work hard and faithfully; that

we should prize intelligence, but prize courage and honesty and

cleanliness even more. Inefficiency is a curse; and no good intention

atones for weakness of will and flabbiness of moral, mental, and

physical fiber; yet it is also true that no intellectual cleverness, no

ability to achieve material prosperity, can atone for the lack of the

great moral qualities which are the surest foundation of national might.

In this great free democracy it behooves all the people so to bear

themselves that, not with their lips only but in their lives, they shall

show their fealty to the great truth pronounced of old—the truth that

Righteousness exalteth a nation.

The Pioneer Spirit and American Problems

For a number of years I have believed and urged the principles I set

forth in the following article. Their presentation here is in substance

what I said in three recent speeches at Cheyenne, Denver, and Omaha.

The men who have made this great republic what it is, and especially the

men who have turned it into a continental commonwealth, have possessed

in the highest degree the great virile virtues of strength, courage,

energy, and undaunted and unwavering resolution. Their typical

leaders—of whom Abraham Lincoln, though the most exceptional, was the

most typical—have possessed keen intelligence, and a character not

merely strong but lofty, a character exalted by the fact that great

power was accompanied by a high and fine determination to use this great

power for the common good, for the advancement of mankind. Such men were

the builders of New England. As the country grew, such men were the

pioneers that pushed the frontiers of civilization westward. A hundred

years ago, when men spoke of the West, they meant the country between

the Alleghanies and the Mississippi. Fifty years ago the white man’s

West took in Minnesota, Iowa, and Kansas, and then skipped across to

California and Oregon. The country of the great plains and the Rockies

has grown up within my own lifetime. I myself saw and took part in the

closing years of the pioneer period, and it was my great privilege to

work side by side with the pioneers—the ranchmen, the miners, the

cow-punchers, the mule-skinners, the bull-whackers—who actually opened

up the country. I now travel in every comfort on railways across lands

which, when I first rode across them, were still the home of the Indian

and the buffalo; and I find cities where one can obtain not merely

comfort but luxury, in the places where, thirty years ago, there was not

a building beyond a log hut or a ’dobe house. The men who did this work

were engaged in the final stages of conquering the continent; and it was

their privilege to do one of the great works of all time, to do their

part in the performance of an epic feat in the history of the progress

of mankind.

The pioneer days are over, save in a few places; and the more complex

life of to-day calls for a greater variety of good qualities than were

needed on the frontier. There is need at present to encourage the

development of new abilities which can be brought to high perfection

only by a kind of training useless in pioneer times; but these new

qualities can only supplement, and never supplant, the old, homely

virtues; the need for the special and distinctive pioneer virtues is as

great as ever. In other words, as our civilization grows older and more

complex, while it is true that we need new forms of trained ability, and

need to develop men whose lives are devoted wholly to the pursuit of

special objects, it is yet also true that we need a greater and not a

less development of the fundamental frontier virtues.

These qualities, derived from the pioneers, were not confined to the

pioneers. They are shown in the deeds of the Nation; and especially in

the two great feats which during the past decade have made the deepest

impression abroad—the cruise of the battle fleet around the world, and

the digging of the Panama Canal.

Now, there is no use of a nation claiming to be a great nation, unless

it is prepared to play a great part. A nation such as ours cannot

possibly play a great part in international affairs, cannot expect to be

treated as of weight in either the Atlantic or the Pacific, or to have

its voice as to the Monroe Doctrine or the management of the Panama

Canal heeded, unless it has a strong and thoroughly efficient navy. So

far from this increase in naval strength representing on our part either

a menace of aggression to weaker nations or a menace of war to stronger

nations, it has told most powerfully for peace. No nation regarded the

cruise as fraught with any menace of hostility to itself; and yet every

nation accepted it as a proof that we were not only desirous ourselves

to keep the peace, but able to prevent the peace being broken at our

expense. No cruise in any way approaching it has ever been made by any

fleet of any other Power; and the best naval opinion abroad had been

that no such feat was possible; that is, that no such cruise as that we

actually made could be undertaken by a fleet of such size without

innumerable breakdowns and accidents. The success of the cruise,

performed as it was without a single accident, immeasurably raised the

prestige, not only of our fleet, but of our Nation; and was a distinct

help to the cause of international peace.

As regards the Panama Canal, I really think that outside nations have a

juster idea than our own people of the magnitude and success of the

work. Six years ago last spring the American Government took possession

of the Isthmus. The first two years were devoted to the sanitation of

the Isthmus, to assembling the plant and working force, and providing

quarters, food, and water supplies. In all these points the success was

extraordinary. From one of the plague-spots of the globe, one of the

most unhealthy regions in the entire world, the Isthmus has been turned

into a singularly healthy place of abode. Active excavation on a large

scale did not begin until January, 1907. Three years and a half have

gone by since then, and three-fifths of the total excavation has already

been accomplished. In 1908 and 1909 the monthly average of rock and

earth removed was three million cubic yards, notwithstanding the fact

that nine months of each year constituted a season of very heavy

rainfall; but it is impossible to maintain such a ratio as the depth

increases. Still, it is certain that such a rate can be maintained as

will enable the workers to finish the excavation considerably in advance

of the date fixed for opening the Canal—January 1, 1915. Indeed, I shall

be surprised if the Canal cannot be opened six months or even a year in

advance of the time set. The work has two great features: The Culebra

Cut, which I have been considering, and the great dam at Gatun. The

construction of the dam has advanced sufficiently to convince the

engineers in charge of the work of its absolute stability and

imperviousness. The engineer in charge has announced that all the

concrete in all the locks will be in place two years hence.

This is a stupendous record of achievement. As a people we are rather

fond of criticising ourselves, and sometimes with very great justice;

but even the most pessimistic critic should sometimes think of what is

to our credit. Among our assets of the past ten years will be placed the

extraordinary ability, integrity, and success with which we have handled

all the problems inherited as the result of the Spanish War; the way we

have handled ourselves in the Philippines, in Cuba, in Porto Rico, in

San Domingo, and in Panama. The cruise of the battle fleet around the

world was a striking proof that we had made good with the navy; and what

we have done at Panama represents the accomplishment of one of the great

feats of the ages. It is a feat which reflects the highest honor upon

our country; and our gratitude is due to every man who has taken an

honorable part in any capacity in bringing it about.

The same qualities that have enabled Americans to conquer the

wilderness, and to attempt tasks like the building of the Panama Canal

and the sending of the battle fleet around the world, need to be applied

now to our future problems; and these qualities, which include the power

of self-government, together with the power of joining with others for

mutual help, and, what is especially important, the feeling of

comradeship, need to be applied in particular to that foremost of

National problems, the problem of the preservation of our National

resources.

The question has two sides. In the first place, the actual destruction,

or, if this is not possible, at any rate the needless waste, of the

natural resources must be stopped. In the second place, so far as

possible, these resources must be kept for the use of the whole people,

and not handed over for exploitation to single individuals or groups of

individuals.

The first point I shall not here discuss at length. It is rapidly

becoming a well-settled policy of this people that we of the present

generation hold the land in part as trustees for the next generation,

and not exclusively for our own selfish enjoyment. Just as the farmer is

a good citizen if he leaves his farm improved and not impaired to his

children, and a bad citizen if he cares nothing for his children and

skins the land and destroys its value in his own selfish interest; so

the Nation behaves well if it treats the soil and the water and the

forests as assets which it must turn over to the next generation

increased and not impaired in value, and behaves badly if it leaves the

land poorer to those who come after us. No farm should be so used that

the soil is permitted to depreciate in value; no forest so used as

permanently to impair its productivity.

The second part of the question relates to preserving and using our

natural resources in the interest of the public as a whole. We do not

intend to discourage individual excellence by improperly diminishing the

reward for that individual excellence; on the contrary, our desire is to

see that the fullest reward is given to the men of exceptional

abilities, up to the point when the abilities are used to the detriment

of the people as a whole. We favor the sheep man who feeds his sheep on

his own range in such manner that the range increases instead of

diminishes in value; and we are against the big man who does not live in

the country at all, but who sends migratory bands of sheep with a few

hired shepherds to wander over it, destroying pasturage and forests, and

seriously impairing the value of the country for actual settlers. We are

for the liberty of the individual up to, but not beyond, the point where

it becomes inconsistent with the welfare of the community as a whole.

American problems · 第 3 / 4 段