New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-02-25
THE TEXAS ANTITRUST LAW VOID.

The decision of Judge Swayne Of the United
States District Court regarding the Trust law
of Texas is the more important because IT ap-
niles TO statutes which have been or are now
being passed in other States. 1t was imagined
nv the trainers of the law. who are mainly Pop
uljsts or Democrats of the Populist variety that
great good could be accomplished by making
its provisions extremely stringent, and appli-
cable 70 every form of agreement or combina-
ton to control prices. always excepting an!
combination of farmers to advance prices or
their products and of wage-earners 10 main
tain their wages But the court now declares
the Texas act null and void for this very rea-
son The decision says:
The vice of the act in question is that II at
tennis TO prevent too much: it does not STOP at
reasonable limits; it Is not content with max.
ing criminal a general restraint OF trade' put !.
makes criminal all restrictions OF trade; IL is
not content with affixing penalties TO acts or
contracts which unreasonaby restrict compeu-
ton, but condemns any agreement which pre-
vents competition between two or more persons
entering into it, This law . is not just. is
utterly without supporting law, and can nave
10 lust purpose; is vicious legislation oeprNins
the citizen of his constitutional rights OF ne I'D
erty and property without due process or Jaw
contrary to the law of the land, and Is there-
fore declared to be null and void.
Notice was given of an appeal to the Supreme
Court but few who are able TO comprehend the
decision and the principles upon which 1t rests
will look for a reversal. IL IS SAID that oiher
antitrust laws have been sustained, and that
It has been held that combinations are inimlcai
10 the public welfare which unreasonaby fix
and maintain prices of products. But past de-
cisions have rested upon differen; points, ana
have related 10 statutes of different character.
Such statutes have either made an actual injury
TO the public by combination an essential part
of the offence. or have not been fully challenged
as to their disregard of constitutional rights.
The failure of other statutes to reach the end
desired by their trainers is fact of general
knowledge and Of constant complaint by those
who believe that everybody except farmers ana
trades-unionists should be deprived OF the right
to combine for their mutual benefit.
The Texas law was expressly intended to
make the combination itself and not the per-
Torrance of any act prejudicial TO public wei
fare the body of the offence. Combination for
the purpose of doing harm, which actually does
do harm, can be assailed on that grolhd, Dut
there is some proof needed. The mere act OF
combination of agreeing with others. is not ana
cannot be made unlawful in the absence of I'M
lawful purposes or acts. The decision or the
Circuit Court says most distinctly:
All the rights of contract which are necessary
for the carrying on of ordinary business affairs
are protected by the Constitution. ard are not
capable of being restricted by legislative acuon'
A man may form business relations with
whom he plea,es. and in the conduct of such
business they may fix and limit the prices they
will charge for their products which they oneT
to the public. or about which they contract.
1t is part Of the natural and civil liberty TO form
civil relations free from the dictaton OF the
State.
The Texas law does not forbid the misuse OF
this natural power to the actual detriment OF the
people but forbids the bare exercise of the natu-
raj right to form an agreement with business
associate The Judge did not dwell, at least in
the part of the decision transmitted by tele-
graph, upon the amazing discrimination at
tempted between farmers and trades-unionlsts
on one side. and all other citizens on the other,
as to their right 10 combine But II Is the most
discreditable part of the Texas statute. and or
others like il which have been enacted or pro-
posed, that an attempt TO raise the price OF a
farm product or OF wages, it is assumed. cannot
be unjust excessive or wrong, while it is also
assumed that any attempt TO raise the price FOR
any other product or service must be unjust. eX-
cessive and hostile to public welfare. Sane men
who are in the least accustomed TO respect the
rights Of others. or acquainted with the natural
laws which govern all business between men,
find it hard to comprehend the state OF mind
which prompts such a provision of law. Yet it
must be recognized as the state of mind which
does really govern great bodies of Populisis AMI
Populstic Democrats in their acts, and not
few organizations Of farmers and wage-earners
TO these very people. no less than TO the whole
country. it is "A blessing that the Constitution
stands in their way and will not let them per-
petrate the self-destructve wrongs which they
try 10 nfct on others