The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-03-25
SOME LIFE IN TT.

After having the vitality Of it knock
ed out by the courts in cases which
the Sherman antitrust act Of 1890 was
designed to meet, the supreme court
of the United States, with four dissent
ing judges, infused it with life to meet
cases that were not in mind at its
framing and enactment We refer to
the recent decision holding that the
agreement Of the roads entering into
the trans Missouri joint traffic agree
ment is lin rstraint of trade and COM
merce," and therefore, a violation of
tn antitrust act. Antedating the pass
age Of the latter was the interstate
commerce act, with its prohibition of
pooling earnings or freights by rail-
way companies, and that was thought
sufficient to meet the evils of pooling
complained of while the Sherman anti
| trust act was generally accepted as in
tended to reach the sugar and other
trusts. The case wildly illustrates the
two certafnties that always attend
these regulative and repressive laws;
| the certainty that they will not effect
their intended purposes, and the GER
tainty that no one can tell what they
will affect.
This case virtually determines the
fate of the joint traffic association en-
! tered into and becoming operative in
January, 1896, by the trunk lines east
Of Chicago, the ultimate purposes of
the two associations being similar,
however different may be their methods
of reaching the common end. It will
probably revive the efforts to pass the
bill that was defeated in the Fifty
third congress permitting pooling, and
which was defeated chiefly because the
interstate commerce commission in
sisted that the pool agreement should
be submitted to and approved by it be-
fore going into effect, while the rail-
ways proposed that the agreement
should be merely filed with the COM
mission, leaving it's merits to be con-
tested before the commission or in the
courts by interested parties. With the
official supervision of the terms of the
pool by the commission, representing
the interests of the people, the serious
objection to pooling, the fixing of rates
and distribution of freights by parties
only interested in getting out of the
traffic "all it will bear" would be re-
moved
But what remains inexplicable to the
common mind is why, if the antitrust
act is enforceable against railways that
attempt to fix and maintain rates, as
being Gin restraint of trade and COM
merce." it is not equally efficacious
against the sugar trust formed to fix
prices and monOpolize the product It
is true that a railway crosses states
and carries interstate commerce. but
it is equally true that the trust, in its
operations, crosses state lines and en-
cages in interstate commerce. In fact.
for all practical purposes, for the eff
fectiVe execution of it's methods. the
| trust operates railways The whole
! salers are merely it's agents compen-
stated by a rebate on sales of "a Of a,
! cent a pound. The sugar is the proper
! ty of trust until sold and delivered.
| 1t fixes the price at eack point Of
wholesale and distribution by adding
| to the New York price the intermediate
freight. 1t thus incorporates railway
| freights in its price and makes rail
| WAYS the instrument Of itc ip+arc+o+o
commerce. 1t is, we repeat utterly in
comprehensive to intelligent Iaymen
| this distinction that makes az anti
trust law fit one kind OF interstate
commerce and be inapplicable to an
! other practically identical.