The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-03-28
THE CONFLICT OF LAWS.

TO the untutOred MIND or the layman
there seems to be a conflict of laws in
the various courts Of the country in
their endeavor to adjust statutory and
common law to the commercial devel-
opment that in recent years has taken
place, having several branches, but all
Springing from the same root, the or
ganizatiOn of men or the concentration
of capital. or both, for the purpose Of
controlling the business in which each
branch is engaged. These movements
are either organizations of labor or
consultations Of factories or a prac-
teal consolidation of railways through
traffic agreements that regulate the
charges for carriage or the distribution
of freights or Of earnings. Labor strives
to maintain or increase it's wages, man.
ufacturers strive to stif1e competition
and railways endeavor to minify it
where it cannot be eliminated. The
movement clearly antagonizes old and
settled notions that are imbedded in
our common law as well as in the pop
ular belief In the latter the Feeling
is expressed by the adage that "compe-
tition is the life of trade" and in the
common law in its prohibition of fore
stalling of acts in restraint of trade.
Congress and the states enact anti
trust and combination laws, and the
courts construe them. 1t is the seeming
conflict in their decisions that causes
confusion in the lay mind
1t is worth while to make note of the
progress the courts are making in ad-
justing law to the new conditions. In
the BOhn cases we have our own SUI
preme court laying down the broad
principle that what is lawful for one
man to do is lawful for combination
OF men to do. and applying it to the
case of an association of lumber deal
ers who fined a member who sold to
persons not members of the associa-
ton, the object being to control the re-
tail trade. In a case presenting similar
facts the supreme court of Indiana
cites but refuses to follow the Mime
sofa court, and holds such purposes IN
lawful. The sugar trust is held to be
exempt from the antitrust act Of con-
gress, although 1t practically monop-
olizes the sugar markets and fixes the
price of sugar because its locus is
within state. and congress can deal
only with interstate commerce, while
the same court holds the agreement Of
the Trans-Missouri Freight association.
formed to maintain uniformity Of rates.
to be a violation Of the antitrust act.
Three days before the federal court
of appeals in New York had held the
agreement of the joint traffic associa-
ton, formed by the great trunk lines
east of Chicago, having purpose iden-
tical with that of the trans Missouri
association, not violation of the in
terstate commerce act prohibiting pools
and expressed grave doubt whether
the antitrust act applies to it.
Again, we had the court Of appeals Of
New York holding, in a case recently
commented on, that the majority stock
holders could not injure the minority
by so managing the business OF the
corporation as to benefit a competitor.
and we now have the court Of COM
mon pleas OF Ohio, in the suit of the
Arbuckles minority stockholders in the
Woolson Spice company, against the
HaYemeyers, virtually, as holders of
the majority stock, holding that it Is
not unlawful for the majority to sell
the product at such a price as will
crush out a competitor. In line with
this decision is that OF the vice chan
cellor Of New Jersey, in the suit against
the American Tobacco company. q
combination pursuing the methods of
the sugar trust, and refusing to sell
its products to dealers who handled
those of other concerns, or cot prices;
holding, regardless of motive, that a
corporation has the same right that an
individual has, of selling or not SELL
ing to whom he pleases.
Again, and. to q layman. in seeming
conflict with some Of these decisions,
when he attempts to square them with
his notions Of fundamental principles,
IS the decision of the court Of appeals
In New York in a case where a man
brought suit for damages against the
officers Of a labor organization who