The state herald., 1898-11-04
RESULTS OF THE DECISION.
John X. Richards Talks OF Eject of
Jp.ut Traffic Finding.

I
Washington, ID. c., Oct. 28.-Solicitor
General John X. Richards, who had
charge Of the governments side of the
Joint Traffic Association case before
the United States Supreme Court, wns
questioned today, after he had an op-
portunity to read its full text, us to
the effect of last Mondays decision OIL
the railrOad interests Of the country.
Mr.. Richards snid:
"The Sherman antitrust act declares
| illegal every contract combination In
the form of trust or otherwise, or con-
| spiracy In restraint of trade or COM
merce among the several states The
| Joint traffic case cllnches the decision
In the transmissouri case, holding that
the law applies to railroads and pro-
hibits nll agreements In restraint of
| trade and commerce. In addition, II
holds explicitly that the law Is con-
stitutional when thus applied, even to
reasonable agreements in restraint OF
trade.
"The constitutionality of the act
was not raised in the transmissouri
case, but in the Joint traffic case. Mr..
Phelps directed his entire argument to
this point, urging that Congress could
not declare Illegal and prohibit reason
able contracts. The freedom of con.
tract guaranteed by the constitution
forbade ii, he insisted. The answer of
the court in this was that railroads
enjoy public franchises, they perform
public services and when engaged In
Interstate commerce are subject to the
regulations of Congress.
What the ultimate result of the de-
cision will be 1t is impossible 20 say.
Cases which establish important priu-
ciplcs usually affect, not simply courts.
but legislatures, in n way one cannot
foresee. 1t is gratifying to believe that
the sentiment of the people against in
furious monopolics can find Legitimate
expression through laws passed by
their representatives us enforced by
the court
Il know it has been and Is insisted
that competition destroys rates, and
railroads. too. but nevertheless there IL
settled sentiment among the people
against railroad monopOlies and In
favor of unrcstrained competition.
Most of the states. some in their con
stitutions and some In their laws. have
prohibited the consolidation of COM
peting lines. Congress In the inter
state act prohibited pooling. which Is
simply one mode of preventing com.
petition TO keep up rates.
There are men of thought who in
sist that regulation should supplant
competition. but the people do not yet
think so. In fact, competition is the
recognized underlying basis of social
and Industrial and political life in this
country. Competition goes along with
freedom. with independent action. The
country was founded on the principles
of liberty and equality. Its founders
sought TO secure to every citizen an
equal chance under the lava fair
showing in the race of life.
Under this decision II Is left to open
competition to secure reasonablcness
in rates. 1t is true that the common
law requires that rates shall he rca-
sonablc. So does the Interstate com
mercc law. But this is n mere declara-
tion, and there is no adequate remedy
TO enforce the barren right. Congress
has not given the Interstate Commerce
Commission power over rates. II has
relied upon competition to keep them
fair. Whether Congress will see tit To
take the railroads out of the operation
OF the natural law of trade. and for in
dependent competition substitute gov
ernmcntal regulation, remains TO he
seen"