The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1896-12-11

panies orgn.'txed IN countries which
rcruSc like, privileges tn American
companies, q deemed II my duty to al.
ircct u suit TO be brought In the touth.
crn district of New York to cnJofn the
consul mmatlon Of the plnn above men.
toned. Ny chief design was to nfrord
Congress- IN opportunity 10 uct upon
the matter before this cable should be
lald,'
ways, the attorney general Snya that
the report OF Hon. GOorgl. II, lioadlcy,
speoIall counsel for thu United States.
shows that th.-e Is NJ substantial
change In the STATE Of rho litigation
about the Union Pacific railway and
ita branches.
He Cuneinucs. "t have ~ ave doubts
rs to the ability OF tho government to
preserve the present situation much
longer, l am advised that an attempt
viii be mnde to enforce tho govern
| ment's appearance In TIM foreclosure
case with a Wow OF giving n complete
title to the purchasers Mt the fore
closure. While I believe tho position
heretofore taken and still n Maintained
for the government IN the true one,
Z namely, that its appearance cannot be
compelled, it must be cOnfesSsi that tho
contention OF opposing couIi sells In at
Leash debatable, VITA: That while the
government cannot be sued with ~
view TO recovery agIinss u, II may
properly be made n party to q suit
In equity brought by the holders OF
bonds issued by Its express consent up
ION property upon which It has Itself
/ eEerved a lien.
A the only object OF s.cadtastly
L eeplng the government out OF the
G. tseS thus far has been to securc some
Il :VOrable solution OF the di iicult prob
le m presented by Its OWE rship OF a
sn bcrdinnte security upon property
whose value Is generally believed 10
be insufficient to pay In full any but
the first mortgage Hens, l think that,
nnlfss he pending fundtng bill be
pas sed and accepted. the government
sho gld cndchvor to secure terms for
its' appearance In court In the way OF
an Insurance OF such n bL on che pro-
pertS In case OF judicial sale rs will
sccrtrc to It n fair realization OF the
vnlLie OF Its lien, II this BE- not done
nnd the government should be compell-
ell 70 sue TO protect its Owl interests
or : required TO appear and set up It's
clnlI II In the pending cases, the benefit
OF the position 81 LONG maintained
rnIr' be largely lost.
GA the subject OF the antitrust law
the attorney general SayS:
The restricted. scope OF the provisions
OF this law, US they have been con-
strned by the courts. especially In the
case OF United States VI. Z. C. knight
company, makes nmeDdments neces-
slry II any effective action Is expect
ed, from this department Besides the
fund At the disposal OF the attorney
general which can be applied 10 the
Investigation, preparation, and prose-
cutton Of cases under this law Is who'll
ly Inadequate.
. Many complaints have from time to
;srne been made or private citizens
tnd others against combinations In
restraint OF trade and commerce and
o. alleged ~monopolieS. I have caused
20 be Investigated. as we'll as the means
and force Mt my Command permitted.
such OF them 0s seeued likely TO come
Within the. scope OF federal authority
over Interstate trade aud commerce.
to which alone II extends. The only
case. however. In which sufficient EVIL
Gence was discovered to Justify action
was chat OF the Joint traffic associa-
tIon OF trunk line railways. against
| which a bill was fled by the United
States, January .. 1886, In the circuit
coart for the southern district of New
York Although the case was ably pre-
| hI-tt anu DEtSsTtcl pS hf. "HlilCe
MacFarlane. United States attorney FOR
that district. under my supervislon,thc
court. Judge Wheeler presiding. dimls-
| sell the bill. hoNding that the articles
OF agreement Of the association were
not In violation OF the law. The case Is
nov pending In the circuit court OF ap-
penls for the second circuit and will
| soon be argued. The case OF United
| States vs.La CorupIgnie Franchise, etc.
Is also 20 some extent affected by this
| act.
The clse OF the United States VS.. the
| T-ans-Missour Freignt Association.
consisting OF eighteen railways west
OF the Missouri river. which was
brought In the district OF Kansas 10
enJoin n contract and combination
among these companies to maintain
rates of freight. was decided against
the government In both the circuit
court and the circuit court of appeals,
| one judge OF the latter court dissent
Ing. The cas- is now pending on ap-
peal In the supreme court OF the Uni
ted States and will be argued about the
time Congress assemblies. The circuit
court held in this case n the law IN
question does not apply to railways.
chiefly on the ground that they are
exclusively regulated by the inter-
state n act. The circuit court
OF appeals, without directly passing
upon his question. held that the action
OF the railway companies vas not In
violation OF the act OF July Q. 1890. The
claim that the act does not apply 10
railroads is urged with confidence In
the briefs OF counsel now on hle In the
supreme court. While l maintain the
opposite view and feel confident Of It's
correctness. the fact that such a queS-
ton can be raised. and has already
been raised successfully In one court,
affords an instance OF the indefinite
ness OF the terms Of this law. which IS
q serious obstacle in the way OF Its
prompt enforcement"