Omaha daily bee., 1898-10-30
THE ANTITRUST Law.

The supreme court of the United
States has affirmed the constitutionality
of the antitrust law of 1890. 1t has
decided that the law applies to railroad
combinations to fix rates. Whether or
not it was the intention of congress, at
the time of the enactment of the law,
that it should have this application, Is
no longer a matter for discussion. The
court did not pass upon the policy Of
the legislation, sin ply declaring that 1t
was within the constitutional power Of
congress. This gives the law great
value and will incline the people more
strongly in favor of its retention on the
statute books.
But the law will not accomplish all
that was expected of it in merely pre-
venting associations of railroads to reg
ulate traffic rates. 1t was chiefly in
tended, there can be no doubt, for the
suppression of Industrial and CONNER
cial combinations in restraint of trade.
This it has utterly failed to accomplish
and the supreme court has held, in eff
feet, that it is inadequate for this pur-
pose. Important as it unquestionably
is in the public interest that this law
has been declared applicable to railroad
combinations, it is certainly of no less
importance that there be legislation
which will reach other forms of combi-
nation in restraint Of trade and repress-
i've of competition, if it is within the
power of congress to provide such legis-
lation. Trusts are increasing in num-
Der and in power. The tendency toward
monopoly is as strong today as it has
ever been, If not stronger. This Is not
due, as some allege, to peculiar economic
conditions here, for a similar state of
policy of protection cannot reasonably
be held responsible for trusts here when
like combinations exist in free trade
England. Indeed there is well nigh
| universal tendency in this direction and
the fact that trust development has been
more rapid in this country than in any
other is simply characteristic.
This growth of monopolistic combna
tlons. however, must not be permitted
| to so on if way can be found to put
n stop to it. The public is now secure
against railroad agreements such as that
of the Joint Traffic association. Free
| competition between common carriers is
| assured so long as existing conditions
| prevail. What can be done to insure
unrestricted industrial and commercial
competition is n question worthy the Sc
rious consideration of the most enlight
ened craftsmanship. The supreme
court of the United States has clearly
pointed out that there is a Limitation
upon the power of congress in this mat
ter. 1t cannot go beyond what may b,
necessary for the regulation of inter
state commerce and commerce with for
eign countries, therefore 1t cannot legis
late to reach every sort of trust or com
bination. 1t was held by the suprem,
court in the Sugar trust case that tht
antitrust law applied to monopoles il
restraint of interstate or internationa
trade or commerce and not t,
monopOlies in manufacture evel
of necessary of life. But thi
limitation upon the power OF congress
does not leave the people hopelessly n
the mercy of monopolles. What con
gress cannot do the states may do ant
the supreme court has indicated a praC
ticable course for the states to pursu
which would undoubtedly be effectiv
in represslng trusts. Some of the state
have enacted antitrust laws, but wha
is needed is uniform legislation whlcl
will be faithfully enforced. 1t must b