THE DEATH sentence came from the marketplace.

Boards of directors and company executives were the first jurors: They knew Arthur Andersen had fallen hard. They scattered after the Andersen-assisted collapse of Enron Corp.

Last week's conviction of Andersen in Houston only affirmed an earlier judgment.

More corporate death may follow. Other companies appear vulnerable to prosecution for similar excesses. A mass cleanup by the courts and federal regulatory agencies now seems overdue.

Many innocents have been damaged - some by the loss of a pension or a job, some by falling share prices, some by a general loss of confidence in the stock market. In the midst of it all, Enron announced it has paid $681 million to its 140 senior managers.

Still, it's not surprising that a Houston jury needed 10 days to decide the case against Andersen. Machinations of the sort alleged against Andersen apparently weren't meant to be transparent. Some Enron executives say they didn't understand them. Perhaps they didn't want to.

The SEC had sanctioned Andersen's behavior before, but the company failed to sufficiently alter its behavior. Its effort to obstruct the SEC's investigation became more than a trail of shredded paper: It was a noose.

The government's determination to pursue this case aggressively and its success last week must be applauded. Now, as it proceeds against Enron, it must red-flag weaknesses in the regulatory system that allowed Andersen and Enron to prosper - and to profoundly damage so many workers and investors who could not have imagined losing their jobs or life savings. The process clearly needs shoring up.

Though it could not have been mistaken for a promoter of government regulation, the Bush administration should don the mantle of reform. If the president and Congress do not demand arms-length relationships between accounting firms and the companies they audit, for example, voters can be certain this government has no regard for them.

Andersen and Enron have now shown the ultimate bottom line: Andersen essentially disappears from the corporate landscape. Enron is likely to follow. In the court of public opinion, the verdict has been in for months.

The importance of regulation and oversight has to be relearned from time to time. At the same time, it is worth observing that we are all left at some point to follow our own moral compasses. That remains the first defense against greed and profiteering.

Obviously, though, conscience alone won't suffice. Maybe more aggressive oversight will save business from its own worst instincts.