The Washington critic., 1890-04-09
WASHINGTON, April Q, 1890.
AN INEFFECTIVE BILL.

Senator Sherman, in obedience to
what seemed to him general demand,
introduced bill against trusts which
gave promise of dealing effectively
with some of these monopolies. twas
referred to the Finance Committee of
the Senate, which reported it favorably.
Then 1t was referred TO the Committee
on the Judiciary, which reported an
amended bill, or rather a substitute for
the original bill which wholly emascu-
lated It and rendered it perfectly inef-
fective.
Mr.. Sherman has poor opinion of
the worthless bill which the committee
has provided. According to the st.
Louis Globe Democrat Senator Sher-
man does not mince words in speaking of
the fate of his Antitrust bill. The bill
which the Committee on the judiciary
has Just reported as substitute for the
sherman bill will, in the opinion of the
Senator, be totally ineffective in deal
ing with combinations and trusts. All
corporations can ride through it or over
it without fear of punishment or de-
lection. 1t is manifest, he says, that
if any relief is to be had it must be done
as the result of popular opinion or by
the action of the House. where amend
ments may be provided which will re-
store in substance the original design
Of the bill. lie gives up hope of see
ing any legislation originate in the Sen
ate of such a character rs to cope with
the Trust evil. !"
The Republican majority Of the com
mittee which rendered the Sherman bill
imperative is made up of Senators Ell
munds, Hoar, ingalls,, Wilson of Iowa,
and Evarts, and it is altogether fair to
infer that this aggregation of legal
knowledge had complete comprehen-
sion of what they were accomplishing
when they manipulated and remodeled
Senator Sherma2's work. 1t is known
that that Senator Platt Of Connecticut char
acterzed the bill which was ia; ';oYaOly
reported by the Finance Committee as
"humbug," and it is no secret that
Mr.. Edmunds was opposed to it. 1t is,
therefore, by no means wild or ex-
Iravagant conjecture that Mr.. Sher-
mans bill was amended with sinister
designs and that it was purposely de.
prived of its force.
1t is true that the new bill declares
against Illegal contracts and combina-
uons and all conspiracies in restraint
of trade, but every lawyer knows that
in practice conspiracies are the hardest
things in the world to prove. and that
contracts covering the most nefarious
designs can be made TO look innocent
enough on the surface. The great
trouble with the Judiciary Committee
substitute is that it turns broad,
remedial statute, in which persons were
10 be punished, into an innocuous law,
which corporations can defy because
they cannot be punished criminally.
1t is manifest that if the bill should
pass as now reported, all corporations
would ride through it or over it without
fear of punishment or prevention
There is, indeed, very little hope that
legislation as at present attempted will
do much good That the subject has
been brought under the light of public
discussion is in itself of great benefit,
but in all probability it will take popu-
lar pressure TO bring Senators. who are
really trust attorneys, into accord with
public sentiment on this question.