The Columbus journal., 1898-11-02
ANTITRUST DECISION.
Supreme Court Finds Against
Joint Traffic Association.
LAW Is HELD CONSTITUTIONAL.

Justice 4Ockh0n ADDOo0c00 the Oo0oD-
ioa, Which II Coacurrsd In By Five
Jasticee, with Three Dlssenting-Court
Decides In Favor of Kansas City Live
Stock 8xcha1ee.
The United States supreme court has
decided the Joint Traffic association
railroad case in favor Of the United
States and against the railroads.
The case is considered one Of the most
important that has ever come before the
supreme court, not only to the railroads,
but to the general public. because Of the
vast railroad properties represented by
the traffic association. The association
was formed ON Nov. 10. 1895, by 81 rail-
ways, representing the great trunk lines
and their network Of branches. The
purpose Of the association. as stated in
the articles Of agreement. was Ito es-
tablish and maintain reasonable and
just rates, fares and regulations on state
and interstate traffic" A similar ass0-
citation. ON . smaller scale, was formed
among Southwestern roads. known a.
the Transmissouri association.
These associations were soon attacked
in the courts on the ground that they
were in violation of tie Sherman anti
trust law and also Of the interstate COM
megce law. The Transmissouri first
reached the United States supreme
court, where, in . notable opinion, the
court held that the association was H.
legal, being in effect . combination in
restraint of trade and commerce and in
violation Of the antitrust law. Although
the Missouri case was considered some
what Of test, yet the Joint Traffic asso-
sciation prepared to make q stubborn
contest in support Of its existence. The
case against it was begun ON Jan. z,
1896. in the United States circuit court
for the southern district of New York.
the United States being complainant
and the attorney general directing its
course. The case went against the
government in the lower courts, the cir.
cult court dismissing the bill and the
court Of appeals affirming the dismissal.
The government appealed to the United
States supreme court.
Justice Peckham announced the de-
cision. He said the court could distin.
guished no difference between this and
that of the Transmissouri case, decided
q year ago. which was decided against
the railroads. He said the only new
point involved was as to the constitu-
tionallty of the antitrust act. The court
had reached the conclusion that as rail-
road corporations performed duties of q
semipublic character, it was within the
constitutional power Of congress to reg.
ulate them as provided by the antitrust
act.
The opinion, which was very brief,
was concurred in by Chief Justice
Fuller and Justices Harlan, Brewer,
Brown and Peckham. Three justices
dissented, namely, Gray, Shiras and
White. Justice McKenna took no part
in the case. as the prosecution of the
Joint Traffic association was begun
while he was attorney general, After
Justice Peckham had announced the
opinion, Justice Harlan verbally ex.
pressed, with some evidence of satisfac.
ton, his concurrence ON the same
ground, he said, as that set forth in the
Ttansmissouri case.
Under the decision today, the deci-
sions of the United States circuit court
for the Southern district of New York
and of the United States court of ap.
peals, both of which were favorable to
the Joint Traffic association, are re-
versed.
Justice Peckham also announced the
courts opinion in cases against the
Kansas City Live Stock Exchange. The
government prosecuted under the anti
trust law. The supreme court holds
that the combination does not come
under the antitrust law. Justice Har.
Ian in q dissenting opinion declared
that such combinations were rings or
syndicates which, If extended to oil,
sugar, salt, lumber and other staples
would place the commerce Of the coun-
try under the control of q few rings
ov,H cvyvn6iOafoo