The times., 1898-10-25
ANTITRUST LAW UPHELD
Supreme Court Decision in the
Joint Traffic Case.
LOWER COURT REVERSED
The Only Difference Between This
Case and Tint of the Trans-Mis-
sonri Pa cifc the COnstitutionaIity
of the Sherman Act Against Trusts
Vote of Five to Three.

The United States Supreme Court
handed down an opinion yesterday in
the Joint Traffic Association case. The
opinion was in favor of the United
States and against the railroads. 1t re-
verses the decree of the Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Second circuit, sitting in
New York city, and is very similar to
the opinion rendered in the TRANSMITS
souri, Pacific case
The court by a vote of five to three
Odstices Gray, Shiras and White) re-
versed the findings of the lower court.
incidentally this decision affirms the
constitutionality of the antitrust law.
Justice Mckenna took no part in the
decision.
The Joint Traffic Association was
formed November 10, 1895. by thirty-one
railroads, representing all of the great
trunk lines and their network of
branches. The purpose OF the associa-
tion, as stated in the articles of agree.
ment. was to establish and maintain
reasonable and just rates and rules and
regulations on State and interstate traf-
hc. a similar association on smaller
scale was established among southwest
ern roads known as the Trans Missouri
Pacific
The associations were soon attacked
in the courts the ground that they
were in violation of the Sherman anti
trust law and also of the interstate
commerce law. The Trans-Missouri Pa
oihc case first reached the United States
Supreme Court, which held that the as
sociation was Illegal, being, in effect, a
combination in restraint of trade and
commerce, and therefore violative of the
antitrust law.
This opinion was by a divided bench.
Chief Justice Fuller and Justices Hac-
Ian, Brewer, Brown and Peckham held
the traffic association TO b. Illegal, while
Justices Field, Gray, Shiras and White
filed a dissenting opinion, upholding the
association. Soon after this decision
Justice Field gave place to Justice Nc
Kenna.
The main contention of the Govern
ment was that a traffic agreement is a
combination to prevent competition,
thus constituting u contract in restraint
OF trade or commerce
The answer of the association main
tanned the legality of the agreement on
the ground that the vast needs of COM
merce require joint action, and that such
action insures uniform and just rates and
prevents secret and unjust discrimina-
tons
Justice Peckham announced the opinion
yesterday and stated that the court could
distinguish no difference between the Joint
Traffic Association case and that of the
Trahs-Aissouri Pacific, which was de-
cided 4 year ago against the railroads.
He S9i he fo1KV involved
as to the constitutionality of the anti
trust act. The court had reached the
conclusion that as railroad corporations
performed duties of a semi-public char
acter II was within the constitutional pow
ers of Congress to regulate them pro-
vided by the antitrust act. The only
question, then, was as to the policy of
Congress in adopting such measure, and
with questions of policy the court had
nothing to do.
The roads composing the Joint Traffic
Association are Allegheny Valley, Bal
tirnore and Ohio, Baltimore and Ohio
Southwestern, Canadian Pacific, Central
Railroad of New Jersey Chesapeake and
Ohio, Chicago and Erie Chicago and
Grand Trunk. Cleveland. Cincinnati, Chi
cago and St. Louis; Delaware Lacka-
wanna, Detroit, Grand Haven and Mil
waukee; Erie. Grand Rapids and Indi-
and Michigan Southern Lehigh Valley,
Michigan Central, New York Central,
New York, Chicago and St. Louis; New
York, Ontario and Western: Northern
Central; Pittsburg, Fort Wayne and Chi
cago: Pennsylvania, Philadelphia and
Reading: Philadelphia Wilmington and
Baltimore; Pittsburg and Lake Erie
Pirtsburg and Western, Pittsburg, Gin
cinnati, Chicago and st. Louis; Terre
Haute and Indianapolis; Toledo, Peoria
and Western; Wabash and West Shore.
The Joint Traffic Association has juris-
diction over competition traffic which
passes TO. from or through the western
termini of the Trunk Lines via Toronto
Suspension Bridge, Niagara Falls, Buff
faIo. Salamonca, Erie, Pittsburg. Belair
Wheeling, Parkersburg, Charleston, w
Va, Kenova. w Va, and Ashland, Ky.
The decision of the court practically
puts an end to all similar associations
which have for their purpose the com
bined effort to maintain rates, and thus
make the same rate to all competitive
points. 1t breaks up the most perfect
railroad association in the United States
Justice Peckham also announced the
courts opinion in cases against the Kan.
sas City Live Stock Exchange, operating
at Kansas City and Western Missouri
The Judgment of the lower court was re
versed on the ground that the members
of the Live Stock Exchange We're not en-
gagged in interstate commerce and wer'
therefore not amenable to the law.
Justice Harlan strongly dissented from
this opinion If the methods employed b!
the Live Stock Exchange were not full!
under the term boycott" he was unable
to otherwise designate their action.