The San Francisco call., 1897-09-26
CRIMES IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE.

TOW that prosperity has dawned upon the nation and
business of all kinds revivng shall not probably
hear much about trusts, pools, monopoles ana
other things with which the politicians and demagogueS con-
jure during political campaigns. Prosperity has pleasing
way dstrang minds of the people from the various
schemes for the reform of the government with which the
politicians constantly pesterng them In other wofds,
when the people making money they have no time to listen
to the pantive appeals of the oceseeking classes for
chance at the treasury.
Nevertheless before the calamity passes into history
we'll notice phase of it which has given the courts
great deal of trouble during the past four or five years. we
refer TO the demand of political agtatos for the passage OF
laws making poo and other agreements in restraint OF
trade criminal their nature This kind of legislation forms
entirely chapter in the criminal codes of the American
republic The theory upon which it is founded is that the
eents referred would way prevent the evils of
which the mercantile and aborng classes have complained
Entire sight of the of commercial depression seems
have teen lost by the promoters of these enacmen he
people through their legislators have looked only the
surface things They have made attempt to reach cor
conclusions They have, fact struck right and left at
the results rather than the of hard times.
lawyer named W. L. Royal has recently issued a
pamphlet upon this subject in which he reviews celebrated
that recently argued before the English courts 1t
involved the doctrine which underles all the legislation to
which have referred 1t not criminal proceeding
but action to annu contract in restraint of trade arose
the steamship traffic between China and England One
of the lines organized pool by which another line was shut
out of portion of the trade and the line Disseminated against
applied the English courts for protection the ground that
the combination being restraint of trade Illegal
All the English Judges before whom the came in the
various stages progress upheld the contract not the
ground that legal but the ground that the courts had
power interfere with it. Lord Norris who wrote the
opinion of the High Court of Justice said that 1T not
illegal for trader aim driving competitor out of bus
ness provided the motive be his gain by appropriation of
the trade
Viewing the decision from the American standpoint Mr.
Royal declares that system which has resulted from the
criminal of the remedies provided by law for the same
evils in this country practically submits all agreements alleged
be in restraint of trade to the arbitrary discretion of the
Judges of of equity rather than the laws
ttion In Mr.. Royals judgment this in the end will result
not in the ameioraton of the evils complained of but in
legislative and judicial despoism
AS unlikely that either the courts American egsla
will enquish the theory upon which they attempting
restrain pools trusts and monopoes it is not clear but Mr.
Debs idea of change of system is Debs
the Government take charge of all business of
kind and work state account This would provide nearly
every with office and give labor what it wantsa fair
days pay for fair days work How the taxpayng classes
would get along would be another problem Presumably their
only remedy would be to sell their holdings in with the
Social Democracy and get an office.